Wikipedia

Talk:Bev Perdue

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Untitled

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

If someone has another free picture that's... more flattering, would they be so kind as to upload it? The picture we have right now is neither flattering nor a good representation of Bev Perdue. If I had that picture and I saw her, I wouldn't know they were the same person. 134.173.165.211 (talk) 05:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Isn't Bev Perdue the 73rd governor of North Carolina? everywhere else on the internet and Bev Perdue says so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.105.189.93 (talk) 16:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Bias

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

This article has a clear and decisive bias against the Governor. It is clearly written in a manner to which discredits Governor Perdue. I mean a simple joke gets more coverage than her entire issues section and is taken way too seriously. Plus the campaign finance section does not to be nearly as long as it is. Not only this but the overall tone of the writing leans to the right quite a bit. It just really irks me to see such severe bias on pages of either Democrats or Republicans.--Politicsislife (talk) 20:52, 22 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Could you quote some specific passages from the text that you feel are biased? I see very little to no POV in this article myself, but I'd be interested to know what you see. Evanh2008, Super Genius Who am I? You can talk to me... 21:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
I probably overreacted posting this here. I have been seeing so much bias on wikipedia on both sides lately and I just got annoyed. I have fixed a lot of the bias on this page the last few months and it is not that bad now. The way facts were presented previously, such as the corruption section, the voter id cards, and some other tidbits. For instance the heading once had a big section about the corruption probe (not mentioning her being cleared) and nothing else besides the fact she is Governor. It was ridiculous. Currently I do not think her joke about suspending congressional elections needs an entire section. It was a simple joke, albeit a stupid one, still it doesn't need an entire paragraph. It could easily be a one sentence section. Otherwise political sections is not as bad as it was, but still leans to the right a tad. Thanks for your interest. --Politicsislife (talk) 03:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Why not the whole paragraph? Strikes me that, regardless of party, the 'joke' was a terrible idea and she should never have said it. 63.141.25.162 (talk) 13:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Request edit

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago10 comments5 people in discussion

I have a potential COI (maybe kinda sorta) with the subject of the article. A few items were brought to my attention by someone that is affiliated with her and I am passing them along.

  • In the Lead: "is was under both State and Federal investigation"
  • Near the beginning of the "North Carolina legislature" section there is an unsourced statement saying she represented Craven county. She represented Craven, Lenoir and Pamlico counties in the House and Craven, Carteret and Pamlico in the Senate.[1]
  • There is an unsourced statement under Tenure saying that she was a "senior budget writer" however I am told during this time she was co-chair of the Appropriations Committee[1][2]

As I have a potential COI, hoping an impartial editor will review and consider the corrections. CorporateM (Talk) 00:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Looks fine, good refs, minor, NPOV. Capitalismojo (talk) 22:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I've done the edits. Capitalismojo (talk) 22:44, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ Lori Ann Harris and Marianne M. Kersey, Article II: A Guide to the 1987-1988 N. C. Legislature, N. C. Center for Public Policy Research, Theo Davis & Sons, Zebulon, NC, 1988, p. 168; Kim Kebshull, Article II: A Guide to the 1991-1992 N. C. Legislature, N. C. Center for Public Policy Research, Theo Davis & Sons, Zebulon, NC, 1991, p. 47.

A couple other corrections

edit
@Capitalismojo A couple other things they brought to my attention. Under Early life it says her father was a coal miner and utility CEO and the Lieutenant Governor section says her most significant act was a tie-breaking vote for the lottery. Both of these my contact says are incorrect and both are cited to an article written by Bob Geary, who it says here is a columnist. While it's not clearly labeled as opinion, our own Wikipedia article on Columnist says that it usually means opinion and WP:NEWSORG says not to use opinion pieces, because they tend not to check their facts, as seems to most likely be the case here. According to her biography writer, her father owned one-eighth of United Coal Company, which may be what they were referring to. CorporateM (Talk) 13:46, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Hi User:CorporateM, Bob Geary may be listed as a columnist, but the cited IW article is in the news section. Can you find a RS that says otherwise by any chance? Thanks, a13ean (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
@a13ean. The Charlotte Observer says here that her father was a coal miner and co-founder of the United Coal Company (as oppose to CEO). I don't think I would be able to find a source explicitly identifying her most important contribution while she held office, but I will do a quick poking around. CorporateM (Talk) 21:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

The coal miner line isn't technically wrong. He was a coal miner and later became a CEO of a large utility. It doesn't say he was CEO of a coal mining company. I'll try to improve the wording a little. Gigs (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

It says here that Bob Geary is an "INDY Opinion Columnist". But that doesn't mean that everything he writes is an opinion piece. Most of his articles are in the "column" section, so this article on the "election page" may be an example of a journalism piece with editorial oversight. I've read over the column, and while the subtitle of the piece suggests it might be opinion (Who is better suited for the job?), I don't see that Geary's personal opinion is represented in an overt way in the article (instead the question is either unanswered or the answer is only indirectly addressed). The only opinions I'm reading are quotes from others. So I suspect that this is a non-opinion piece from an author who normally does opinion pieces. For comparison, look at this article from Geary's usual column which is pretty obviously an opinion piece (Geary himself is calling a candidate's statement "stupid politics" and "wrong on the economics"). The tone and slant of the articles are totally different. So I'm comfortable in saying that the election article was meant to be a news article, not an opinion.
I'm trying to find something that either directly contradicts or supports the suggestion that Alfred Moore was ever CEO. I see on this page that Alfred Moore is mentioned as a "founder". (Dec 1986 – United redeemed the ownership of one of its founders, Alfred Moore.) This page shows that the current CEO and president is Michael P. Zervos, who has been CEO since 2005. (Both of those sites are affiliated with the company itself.) That's as much as I could dig up myself in my limited attempts at verification. -- Atama頭 17:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
The article seems to me to read more like a magazine article. Not opinion, but with a little "flavor" to make it more compelling. Regarding the Lt. Gov position, in most states it is a fairly pointless position with no real powers other than tie breaking votes, so the claim there passes the smell test, but it may be the author's opinion to say it was "the most" significant. Gigs (talk) 17:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. It seems consensus is that the source is reliable and not an op-ed, so it is a good thing I used Request Edit to avoid my poor judgement being seen as a COI issue. I am not convinced the information is correct necessarily (the media publishes errors routinely), but it appears to be verified. My suggestion to them will be to seek a correction with the publication. CorporateM (Talk) 18:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Bev Perdue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Bev Perdue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Link rot had already set in before these were archived.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:04, 2 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Bev Perdue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Bev Perdue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 19 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bev_Perdue&oldid=1252089314"