Talk:Joe Moore (politician)

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

Archived discussions[edit]

Some discussions from this talk page have been archived at /Archive 1. Kumar Ramanathan (talk) 23:23, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Joe Moore (politician). 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) 22:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-pasted language needs to be replaced[edit]

I've been making substantial edits to this page in the past few days to remove significant amounts of language copy-pasted from the websites of Joe Moore's PAC and re-election campaign. I have re-organized the page and removed much of the language, but some remains in the Affordable Housing and Elections and Policing sub-sections. I have added the appropriate templates (advertising and copypaste), and would appreciate any help in cleaning up these sections. I have also added electoral history tables, and recovered and re-written some previously deleted information with neutral language and more extensive citations. Kumar Ramanathan (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of reversion on January 9, 2019, including continued concerns about copy-pasted language[edit]

I am responding to an edit made by the User:Zmoore152 timestamped at 21:57, January 8, 2019. After carefully reviewing the edit, I have decided to manually revert the article to the previous version, which is the edit by User:AnomieBOT timestamped at 15:54, January 8, 2019. Following the guidelines on reversion at Help:Reverting, I am using the talk page to explain my reasoning for reversion in detail.

The edit which I am reverting itself constitutes a partial reversion to the version of the article that existed on December 28, 2018. I invite the author to participate in a discussion prior to reversion, as the guidelines encourage. The author's reversion essentially rolls back several edits made by me on January 7 and 8, 2019. I explained my edits as I made them and also highlighted some concerns that led me to flag sections of the page in the previous section on this talk page. Below, I go through my reasoning for reverting Zmoore152's edit in more detail, so as to invite discussion before additional changes are made.

First, I remain concerned that significant portions of the "Aldermanic career" section are copy-pasted from other sources. Here are the instances I've noticed:

Again, the source is cited once, but no quotation marks are used.

  • The language on Rogers Park being identitied as a top neighborhood by Trulia is copy-pasted from this website: [1]. The source is not cited.

Second and relatedly, I am concerned that the above sections are not written in encyclopedia language and do not use a neutral point of view. The article as written in the latest edit do not sufficiently use "independent, third-party sources" as required by the WP:PROMO policy. In my set of edits on January 7 and 8, I attempted to carefully re-write each sub-section by editing promotional language into encyclopedic language from a neutral point of view, and to add extensive independent, third-party sources. Many of these third-party sources are now gone. While it is reasonable to cite the website of a political action committee in a page about a politician, I am concerned that a significant portion of the page relies solely on such sources and is copy-pasted from those sources.

Third, I am concerned that well-sourced and notable information has been removed in the last edit. For example, I edited the language on Moore's committee membership to include additional sources, historical facts (e.g. date of appointment to chairmanship of Committee on Housing and Real Estate), and sourced content with related information on committee meeting attendance. All of this has been reverted in the last edit. I hope that the author of the last edit will participate in more careful and detailed editing of this article that does not lose useful sources and information. As the guidelines on reversion encourage: "Consider what you object to, and what the editor was attempting. Can you improve the edit, bringing progress, rather than reversion?" I strove to follow this principle in my edits on January 7 and 8, as the version history and my edit summaries show. Despite my concerns about copy-pasted language in the "Affordable Housing and Schools" and "Policing", I flagged the sections to indicate my concerns rather than removing the content, since I was not able at the time to re-write the content with new language and sources to address my concerns. Relatedly, but less seriously, the last edit's partial reversion brought back several copy-editing problems (e.g. capitalization after commas, etc.).

Fourth, the author of the last edit argued that the "Controversies" section contained inaccurate information, and removed this section entirely. I had written this section anew, trying to recover some information from previous versions of the article. Some of those previous versions were not written with a neutral point of view and made unsourced claims. In my edits, I used extensive sources for all my claims, and only included information that gained news coverage in local Chicago news outlets. I also made sure to clearly call allegations and claims as such. I invite the author of the last edit to add any sources that explain the inaccuracy of claims or allegations cited in my edits rather than removing the section entirely, or to discuss claims further in this page so that we may work collaboratively to build an accurate and clear article.

Having had some of my edits reverted during my time on Wikipedia, I understand that it can be a frustrating experience. However, given the concerns above, I believe the reversion is necessary and valuable. I invite Zmoore152 and others to discuss any concerns they have on this talk page. Kumar Ramanathan (talk) 16:27, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of edits completed on January 11th, 2019[edit]

I thank Kumarhk for your thorough editing that you completed. I agree that too many of the sources were coming from Joe Moore's website and thus I went through and added additional sources where needed. There are still a couple of areas where I would still like to supplement statements with additional sources (for example the sentence regarding funds secured for Rogers Park schools), and I would love to have your help doing that if you have the time. I will be looking for additional sources in the coming days as I look through the City of Chicago's files on matters relating to public school funding as well as Moore's career before taking office.

I have chosen to revert some of the edits Kumarhk has made however. One of the edits I have chosen to revert was Alderman Moore's committee attendance. The statistic appears to come from a notably right wing and politically motivated think tank. The statistic also didn't seem to add much value to the article in its current form. If Moore's attendance at committee meetings somehow impacted the 49th Ward or the city of Chicago in some manner (either benefiting the community or adversely impacting it), then I would argue the statistic is worth including in the article.

Finally, the grammar in the article certainly needs more work. I hope to continue working with Kumarhk to improve the grammar in the article and I thank Kumarhk for identifying those mistakes. I also still need to fix some bugs in the sourcing which I willbe doing tomorrow. I look forward to continuing this discussion further of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmoore152 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joe_Moore_(politician)&oldid=1209811530"