Talk:Mo Brooks/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Redirect is Inappropriate

Yes, the article is mess up and it requires a serious clean up, but Mo Brooks qualifies for his own article. He has served in the Alabama House of Reps and he has been assistant attorney general for Alabama and he served as Madison County commissioner since 1996. Also, defeated the incumbent Congressman Parker Griffith in the Republican primary in 2010. And finally, ALL pundits and political reviews state that Brooks will win tomorrow (Election Day). It should have never been redirected in the first place. It merely requires clean up. The redirect was done by Tarc without discussion at all. There was no other comments because Tarc did not even ask for input from other editors. It was a completely inappropriate redirect.--InaMaka (talk) 03:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Confederate votes?

I replaced the phrase "first elected Republican District Attorney since Confederate soldiers’ voting rights were restored" with "since the Reconstruction era" for three reasons.

  1. Confederate soldiers never voted in U.S. congressional elections. They were fighting to secede from the United States.
  2. The phrase required a more intimate acquaintance with southern American history than many readers are likely to have. A wikilink to Reconstruction makes it easy to find out more.
  3. I thought the phrase about "Confederate soldiers' voting rights" might be OR, as it implies that "Confederate" votes are a significant pro-Democrat constituency. If that was intentional, it would have to be reliably sourced.

HTH. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 17:50, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Illegal Immigration edit

Originally, I had written this:

Though many constituents support a more strict stance on illegal immigration, some were shocked or alarmed at this comment.

It was edited by Korny O'Near to say:

Some of his constituent were shocked or alarmed at this comment.

The first statement represented the views from some of the named sources, including The Daily Sentinel http://thedailysentinel.com/opinion/editorials/article_ccb48d72-a434-11e0-8c13-001cc4c03286.html, which is in Scottsboro, Alabama. (Scottsboro is in District 5, which is his Congressional District.) This source was included in the very next line, since the full idea that was being sourced took 2 sentences. On videos on WHNT's website, there are people from District 5 who are talked to about how they feel about his words. Example 1 and Example 2. I am wondering if, because there were sources that could back up the original statement, we could potentially restore the original line about some of the constituents being shocked or alarmed. Janers0217 (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that War on Whites be merged into Mo Brooks. I think that there's little to the War on Whites article that is (or could be) separate from Mo Brooks' comments; thus, due to overlap, text, and context, the pages should be merged. I think that the inclusion of the War on Whites comments exclusively on this page would not cause that material to dominate the rest of the article, relieving any WP:WEIGHT concerns. The analogy I'd draw is to controversial comments by other figures such as Steve King ("calves the size of cantaloupes") and Louie Gohmert (terror babies); both comments were controversial and garnered media coverage, but neither is notable enough for its own article. Dyrnych (talk) 14:52, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that, two weeks after Brooks' comments, no real further developments have occurred (nor are they likely to occur). The War on Whites article has not been expanded further and still relates almost exclusively to Mo Brooks. Dyrnych (talk) 18:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
After no response for roughly two weeks, I've merged the articles. Dyrnych (talk) 02:31, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mo Brooks. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 01:45, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mo Brooks. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:46, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

A horribly racist corrupt man

Mo Brooks is showing his true colors now with his attempt to bamboozle the American people. On Cspan he openly spouted hate and blamed immigrants and other foreigners for Donald Trump's loss. Instead of complaining he should go back to meeting in-the-closet men looking for rear entry like he used to in Law School. 223.24.160.118 (talk) 13:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Mo Brooks is trying to rig the 2020 election

According to NBC News https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-loves-rep-mo-brooks-election-objection-congress-can-t-ncna1249957\ He is trying to make Trump the winner of 2020 election and he is trying to rig the election for Trump and Pence and other allies of Trump/Pence/Brooks etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.177.23 (talk) 19:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Removal of a quote

The Immigration section contains a sentence In an interview in 2014, he stated that "8 million undocumented workers, 500,000 young immigrants should be deported". On December 25 I removed it with edit summary = "Removed a sentence which wasn't consistent with WP:RS/QUOTE requirements". On December 27 Masebrock re-inserted it with edit summary = "Undid revision 996330007 by Peter Gulutzan (talk) This quote looks consistent with RS policy. Could you give a more detailed explanation of your objection?".

Actually WP:RS/QUOTE is part of a guideline not a policy, but it says "The accuracy of quoted material is paramount and the accuracy of quotations from living persons is especially sensitive." Since apparently that's not enough, I add: Mo Brooks appears to be alive, WP:BLP is a policy, it says poorly sourced material "should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion".

I urge others to look at the cited source al.com and see that it does contain direct quotes of Mo Brooks, clearly marked, inside quote marks. But "8 million undocumented workers, 500,000 young immigrants should be deported" is not in quote marks, because it is not a quote of Mo Brooks, it is the headline of the article. We couldn't even use the quote if we attributed it to al.com, because WP:RSHEADLINES. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I understand now that the problem is he did not say this statement verbatim, but instead merely answered in the affirmative. You are correct that it should not have been formatted as a direct quotation. Thanks for responding. Masebrock (talk) 07:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2021

Mo Brooks is not a registered attorney yet this website says he is. He did graduate with JD from Alabama but the Alabama bar does not recognize Mr. Brooks.

Brooks, Mr. Morris Jackson, Jr. Inactive – not authorized to practice law in Alabama. University of Alabama School of Law Date Admitted: 09/26/1978

from -> https://www.alabar.org/find-a-member/ Augustine.Chris.Patrick (talk) 13:49, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

We need to reflect what secondary sources say, see WP:BLPPRIMARY, if you know of reliable secondary sources that describe him differently than those could be used. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Brooks' or Brooks's

There seems to be some confusion on whether the possessive form of his last name should be Brooks' or Brooks's. I recently made an edit that included the possessive form Brooks', because that is the way it was written in associated cited article. I am going move forward synchronizing the other instances of Brooks's to be Brooks', but wanted to give a heads-up as to why I'm making the change.Kerdooskis (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kerdooskis: Please see Rule #1 in The Elements of Style: "Form the possessive singular of nouns with 's. Follow this rule whatever the final consonant. Thus write, Charles's friend Burns's poems" – •Raven  .talk 23:52, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

To add to article

To add to this article: Mo Brooks has revealed that he wore body armor at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:43, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

“Terrorist sympathizer”

I like how the first sentence of this article is automatically calling him a name because he doesn’t show shame in a protest that gets overblown by the media. So nice to know Wikipedia is totally neutral Dyldyl9 (talk) 02:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

External links bloat

The following links were trimmed as maintenance:
  • [http://mobrooksforcongress.com/ Mo Brooks for Congress]
  • {{C-SPAN}}
  • {{CongLinks | congbio=B001274 | votesmart=121610 | fec=H0AL05163 | congress=mo-brooks/1987 }}
Per WP:ELPOINTS#3 and Wikipedia:LINKFARM. -- Otr500 (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mo_Brooks/Archive_1&oldid=1094607636"