Wikipedia

Talk:Joe Manchin/Archive 1

< Talk:Joe Manchin
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Sdrqaz in topic Joe Manchin’s Italian surname
Archive 1

Untitled

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

What does the last line of the article mean? It reads:

Much political speculation has surrounded Manchin's possible response should Robert C. Byrd die in office, but Manchin has consistantly refused comment on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.92.67.71 (talk) 12:04, 13 January 2005 (UTC)
As Governor, Manchin would have the power to appoint a sentator to replace Byrd, should Byrd die in office. This applies to all senators, but I assume Byrd's age is why this comment was added. TOO 21:59, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 17:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

West Virginia's First Catholic Governor

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

This is a notable fact since Roman Catholics only represent 8% of West Virginia's population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.50.163.223 (talk) 14:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a citation from a reliable source that supports these assertions?  Frank  |  talk  15:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I believe Wikipedia supports my assertions, based on demographics (8% are Catholics) and backtracking on each previous Governor's religion. I do trust Wikipedia. Here is a reliable source: http://thepublicsquare.blogspot.com/2005/03/west-virginia-gov-joe-manchin-joins.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.50.163.223 (talk) 04:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure how Wikipedia can support your assertions; policy clearly speaks against Wikipedia using itself as a source. In addition, blogs - especially blatantly partisan ones - are generally not considered reliable sources. Having said all that, I'm not saying the information doesn't belong. I'm saying that it isn't automatically notable; if you can find citations that are from reliable sources to support both the assertion and the notion that it is actually notable, then it would be appropriate to put in.  Frank  |  talk  15:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Secretary of State?

There is no info on his time as Secretary, we need to add to this section. Grammarxxx (talk) July 20, 2012. 21:08 (UTC)

help for charles jason lively

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear Mr Manchin..I watched a documentary about Doc Whitley to night..please I beg you to watch this!! Jason Lively got life in prison and Tommy Owens was found not guilty...how could this be. It makes no sense. I don't really even know Jason but he needs help. This case is just like the one about the West Memphis 3...He needs a new trial...I am no body..but i want to be his voice!!! Please reply to me shell_bug2010@yahoo.com. Please Jason needs your help...Can you tell me what needs to be done!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.63.151.72 (talk) 06:23, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Other Background

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article notes Manchin's age, and his reported athletic ability, but doesn't explain how he avoided military service and Vietnam (the biggest war of his lifetime). The article also neglects to mention Manchin voting in favor of the Rubio-McCain-Graham amnesty bill for illegal immigrants in June 2013. So the article lacks historical context and also needs present updating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.97.69.229 (talk) 22:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Senator calling for ban on new drug is father of CEO of competitor

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

http://johnsaddiction.com/7626-joe-machin-zohydro-oxycontin/

Notable enough for a mention? Hcobb (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Joe Manchin. 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.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:27, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Joe Manchin. 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.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Violation of No Original Research

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Removed violation of No Original Research.

Source failed to mention word "bipartisan" one time in source.

Source appears to be a primary source, not a secondary source.

173.225.249.194 (talk) 14:34, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Gayle Conelly Manchin merge proposal

Latest comment: 7 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Gayle Conelly is insufficiently notable in her own right and her article should be merged with that of her husband, Joe Manchin. Quis separabit? 17:59, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Disagree --- all other WV First Ladies have separate articles. To be consistent, they would all need to be merged into their husband's articles. Also, she had made notable contributions on her own and should not be presented as subservient to her husband's positions.--Pubdog (talk) 01:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
"all other WV First Ladies have separate articles." -- that, if true, is kinda absurd, since there is no way they are all notable in their own right. And most certainly it's not MOS as that is not the same for other states. Quis separabit? 01:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
@Pubdog, @TommyBoy -- the ball is in your court. Yours, Quis separabit? 14:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Keep since she is both a former First Lady of West Virginia and currently President of the State Board of Education.--TommyBoy (talk) 08:22, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Keep per TommyBoy. Calibrador (talk) 13:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Keep per TommyBoy.--Pubdog (talk) 21:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please update the "bipartisanship" section to reflect Manchin's votes for many of Trump's nominees. It is a significant, if largely symbolic break from the rest of his party which reflects his willingness to work with Republicans and his moderately conservative political views. This article (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/31/us/politics/trump-cabinet-confirmation-votes.html) may be helpful as a general source. 71.188.237.148 (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  08:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
119.74.136.30 (talk) 07:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 08:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joe Manchin. 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) 13:17, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Not a moderate

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Senator Manchin is by no means a moderate politically. He is cast as a conservative by the press, who I assume is the final arbiter of those designated liberal or conservative or in between. He is a card-carrying member of the NRA, anti-EPA (which even moderate Republicans are in favor of), he is Pro-Life. These are not talking-points of moderation by any stretch... Stevenmitchell (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Joe Manchin. 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) 16:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joe Manchin. 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) 01:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joe Manchin. 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) 17:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

ranking member

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Manchin is ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee; this should be included. 98.10.165.90 (talk) 00:20, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Donald Trump impeachment

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I just added an edit in for Manchins vote with other red state democrat senators against Donald trump, there wasn't a specific section on the impeachment under his tenure section so I just added it into the already made Donald Trump section, everybody cool with that? Or do we need to make a specific section dedicated to Manchins voting patterns with the impeachment? Just curious let me know your thoughts. Thanks!PrecociousPeach (talk) 01:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I think that's enough. -- MelanieN (talk) 01:55, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Abortion

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

NARAL Rating 2016 - 100% Pro-Choice 2017 - 72% Pro-Choice 2018 - 45% Pro-Choice The reason for the differences is that NARAL basis percentages on a person voting for Confirmation or non-Confirmation for a person that is Pro-Life, which is more complicated than just how a person stands on one issue. The fact is that the one Bill mentioned in the article, 20-Week Abortion Ban, (Europe is 12-18 week depending upon the Nation, and Roe v Wade, and Planned Parenthood v Casey states a fetus has rights of Viability), is the only Pro-Life Bill that Senator Manchin has voted on. Senator Manchin, has voted Pro-Choice on 15 other Bills from 2016-2018, according to NARAL, making Senator Manchin voting Pro-Choice on actual Bills. <https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/representative/joe-manchin-iii/>Easeltine (talk) 16:28, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Controversies

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've been poking around at the Controversies section some getting rid of unreferenced material, and BLP stuff. Before I keep going forward I'd like to gain some consensus. I found this section to be a bit problematic with how information from sources is presented.

Heather Bresch: I think it's fair to label this as controversial, but that it's WP:COATRACK. This controversy is about Joe Manchin's daughter. This subsection infers that this involves Joe Manchin because he was governor and imply that he used his power as governor to confer an MBA upon his daughter, this isn't what happened however. Bresch and the President of WWVU were high school friends, and her employer Mylan, paid the President of WVU as a consultant. That is controversial, don't get me wrong, but the article strays from RSs in order to implicate Joe Manchin in this. Which makes it seem like it's WP:NPOV. NYTimes Article on the MBA thing

Skipping Votes and Convention: This states he skipped some votes on controversial bills (for instance repeal of don't ask don't tell), then it quotes the Republican Party as to how he's a essentially schmuck for missing the votes, the article states the reason was that he wanted to attend a Christmas party, I would imagine he missed the votes because he would've had a hard time explaining them during his reelection in West Virgina which is what the Washington Post says (which is the only RS from this section that still works) also the article contradicts the Washington Post because it says he skipped the Don't Ask Don't Tell vote, but the Washington Post specifically states that he voted against the repeal. This is also WP:IRRELEVANT, or this also could be included under political positions, but that it's controversial seems controversial.

Family lawsuit: mentions a lawsuit against his brother Roch which mentions Joe as a co-defendant filed by his other brother John and since withdrawn. It seems this might be more at home as a sentence under personal life. I'm not really sure how this is controversial, and none of the sources mention it as such. The sources also disagree with on the name of Joe Manchin's brother with some referring to him as Rock and others as Roch.

Manchin's coal interests which is just rehashed information from US Senate->Political Positions->Energy and environment. I also read the NY Times article that's cited, the quote is taken out of context but more than that it's WP:Cherry because the conclusions of the article are much different from what the controversy subsection would lead one to believe, and it presents none of the other information, only that which can be used as an attack. Alcibiades979 (talk) 11:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Joe_Manchin#LGBT_rights (LGBT rights section)

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I wonder whether the fact that he voted for Pete Buttigieg and Rachel Levine really belongs in this article, nor in a section of his "political positions" as shedding light on his views about LGBT rights. Strikes me that these votes had very little to do with the candidates' status as members of the LGBT community, nor do any of the sources cited (or any that I've read) suggest Manchin took these factors into account when voting. I would support removing these two bits from the section. I am pinging SeminarianJohn, who added the content. Thoughts? Go Phightins! 02:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

"Joseph A. Manchin III**" listed at Redirects for discussion

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Joseph A. Manchin III**. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 11#Joseph A. Manchin III** until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Talk 03:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Article Protection.

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Dear Wiki admins and Mods,

In case of a future controversy and possibly more potential political and legislation conflict, should the article be put up with a protection?

Sincerely, A Wikipedia user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.79.183 (talk) 18:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You could make a request at WP:RFPP, but it's not been vandalised since protection wore off. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

For the People Act

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There's a slight edit to make for Joe Manchin's stance on voting rights and more specifically the For the People Act, that he ended up voting to advance the bill upon the invoking of cloture after Democrats agreed with his few suggested changes to the bill. The cloture vote failed 50-50, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BananasAreViolet (talk • contribs) 14:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

It is all Joe Manchin's fault right now.

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Senator is the focal point of a synthetic contest over voting rights. Rather than expand upon or analyze what is meant by voting rights - this section briefly points attention to the media's symbolic use of politician Joe Manchin. The news generates yet another promulgation of information about a conflict or contest that really doesn't seem to exist outside of the larger purpose of convincing the public that the US is Democracy.

Economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy and this is never clearer than when the news is filled with absurditities such as the endless attention devoted to "dogged" Joe Manchin and voting rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.219.174 (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Done.

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I can now add this article along with all the others to the list of things I will no longer attempt to assist. Wikipedia in its current form is basically "edit if you want, and then hope and pray that whatever you post won't get deleted because 1 user decides it's not good enough for 'encyclopedic value'". If I went to the Donald Trump article or any other page that's being monitored by an excess of users, and randomly deleted over 4,000 bytes of material because I anointed myself the Overseer of What is Significant, I'd probably get banned. But when someone else does it then they're just monitoring the "good faith mistakes" imposed by myself and others they wish to delete the contributions of. Because I know how this website works, if I restore my edits, they'll get deleted again and I'll get accused of edit warring. If I delete all of my contributions from the site, then I'll be charged with vandalism so there's basically no vehicle to address any of this besides writing on the talk page and being antagonized for trying to add material. Therefore I'll try very hard to no longer be inclined to edit Wikipedia at all as I realize that it is just a glorified nanoscopic club of editors who treat anyone else as intellectually inferior. All hail @Display name 99:, decider of all things worthy of inclusion on Joe Manchin's Wikipissea article! Informant16 (talk) 27 October 2019

The issues seems to be a misunderstanding of the purpose of Wikipedia articles. They are intended to be encyclopedic - to provide an overview of a topic, not to be a comprehensive collection of information, in full detail, about a topic. In this case, Manchin's success (for example) in getting a $1.7 million grant to a West Virginia organization, or his comments about how much people dislike robocalls, if included in the article, would get in the way of its being an overview. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

'Political positions' section

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The section on Manchin's political positions seems rather large, and could be a candidate for splitting into a sub-article, similar to those of Political positions of John McCain, Political positions of Joe Biden, or Political positions of Noam Chomsky, with a summary of the most relevant on this article. RoanokeVirginia (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Funding

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi all

I recently started a section on funding of his Senate campaigns, given the wide media coverage of his funding by the oil and gas industry (he receives the most oil and gas funding of any senator). I would like to expand it to indclude information of funding from other sources but I'm unable to find information on it. If anyone is able to expand it I would really appreciate it.

Thanks

. John Cummings (talk) 22:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In this sentence, "He opposed the energy policies of President Barack Obama, including reductions and restrctions on coal mining...", change "restrctions" to "restrictions" Pierhubert (talk) 11:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

  Done , thank you. Sdrqaz (talk) 12:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Grammar Error

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In the fourth paragraph of the lede, replace "businesses" with "business" in "Manchin's businesses interests." WikiJoe24 (talk) 05:08, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Done, thanks! Marquardtika (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Joe Manchin is a republican

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

He proves it to be true every single day, he is neither representing the democrat party nor his constituents! Let's call a spade a spade and stop lying to ourselves 198.210.106.202 (talk) 13:40, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Gun Control

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Joe, 

  I more or less agree with you right down the line.. Maybe that means I am a conservative Democrat..
  Again, I ask that you stand against punishing we

U.S. law abiding citizens by banning any Soviet ammunition.. 

  This does not hurt the Soviet Government.. If seriously on hurts the American Marksman..
  Please stand against this ill conceived idiocy...
  Keep up the good fight Joe!!

 Thank you Senator Manchin

 Sincerely,
  Rick Neal
  West Virginia 75.108.188.180 (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Manchin's BBB decision and its effect on US GDP

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There are multiple sources reporting that Goldman Sachs shifted its economic outlook for the United States negatively following Manchin's decision.[CNN], [Fortune], [CNBC] This information was initially entered, though reverted and described as WP:COATRACK. Since this edit was directly about Manchin's action of rejecting BBB having a reaction on the entire GDP projection of the United States, it is dubious to revert and accuse the edit of being WP:COATRACK as it is not focused solely on "tangential subjects", this edit focuses directly on the consequences of Manchin's actions according to reliable sources. So, the edit was placed back in and quickly reverted with the user writing "The implicit insinuation that a single senator is responsible for the fate of the American economy is incredibly inappropriate – the source states it is more due to the failure of the bill to pass". Well according to the sources, Goldman Sachs directly states that the GDP was affected by Manchin's decision saying "in light of Manchin’s comments we are adjusting our forecast to remove the assumption that BBB will become law" [CNBC], with the user's statement not meeting WP:VERIFYOR as their edit summary is based on a "personal belief" in complete contrast of what is presented by reliable sources. The sources also directly state that Manchin's action resulted with the shifted economic outlook. So is this edit appropriate? Is there better wording that we can incorporate? Thanks --WMrapids (talk) 21:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

I stand by my reversion. First: the edit's statement that "the senator's decision would result with a lower GDP in the future." implies that GDP will decrease. That is not the case. Goldman Sachs has said that growth will be less (it will still be positive). Second: there is a crucial distinction to make between a GDP projection and the actual GDP. Goldman Sachs makes GDP projections all the time (see MILL) and revises projections as a matter of course. Third: extraordinary claims require exceptional sources. The fact that CNBC and Fortune are not listed at perennial sources is not reassuring, and the fact that it was carried by Bloomberg (fundamentally a business wire) does not serve as an exceptional source.
"But it's true!" is not sufficient. As stated: "undue attention to one particular topic within the scope of the article creates an article that, as a whole, is less than truthful. When confronted with a potential coatrack article, an editor ought to ask: what impression does a reader unfamiliar with the topic get from this article?" I do not think any wording in this article would be appropriate. The information is better off as a statement (without reference to Manchin) in the article for the bill. Sdrqaz (talk) 23:17, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Joe Manchin’s Italian surname

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The article comments briefly on Manchin's Italian paternal ancestors, and notes their last name as 'Mancini', providing one source to that effect. Samuele1607 changed it to 'Mancina' in this edit, which I then reverted, based on the source listed. I am copying Samuele1607's response from my user talk page below. Firefangledfeathers 16:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Good morning.

I know that the source says "Mancini" but the surname is Mancina. I come from the city of his ancestors and I can assure you that no one has the surname Mancini but many people have the surname Mancina, which is one of the most common: I myself have some ancestors with the surname Mancina.

Joe Manchin even came to my town and visited some of his relatives who have the surname Mancina.

I know that unfortunately the source says “Mancini”, but it is not telling the truth.

—Samuele1607 (talk) 08:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

In googling ["Joe Manchin" "Mancini] and ["Joe Manchin" "Mancina"], there are results for both, though Mancini hits outnumber Mancina by about 80 times. Some definitively reliable sources use Mancini, like Politico, New Yorker, and VOA. Manchin's official Senate website does as well. The most reliable sources I found for 'Mancina' were local news site Bluefield Daily Telegraph and sports news site Bleacher Report. I think that's enough for a footnote saying "Some sources spell the name 'Mancina'". Firefangledfeathers 16:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
I have no objection to the proposed changes. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joe_Manchin/Archive_1&oldid=1094621201"