Jump to content

Talk:Andrew Thomas (American politician)

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

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Andrew Thomas (American 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: 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) 00:04, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Andrew Thomas (American 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: 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) 04:17, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Need to update reference to Joe Arpaio article

[edit]

This article has a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#Feuds_with_judges_and_County_Supervisors. The subsection on the Joe Arpaio page that has the relevant content is actually https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#Targeting_of_political_opponents. Macsforme (talk) 21:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:08, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2023

[edit]

"Related to the Wilcox indictment, and a subsequent attempt by the MCSO to intimidate her attorney, The Arizona Republic editorialized that Thomas and Arpaio were misusing their powers to "intimidate and harass their political enemies."[51]" SHOULD BE CHANGED TO SAY "....The Arizona Republic STATED that Thomas and Arpaio were misusing their powers to "intimidate and harass their political enemies."[51]"

USE OF THE WORD "EDITORIALIZED" IN THIS CONTEXT IS, IN FACT, ITSELF A WAY OF EDITORIALIZING. 38.104.7.2 (talk) 19:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not going to implement this right now because I think this needs wider consensus. Reading the source itself, the Arizona Republic article does say "OPINIONS" at the top, which suggests that this is an editorial, not a news article. In this case, the use of the word "editorialized" would be appropriate under the definition of the word "to set forth one's position or opinion on some subject in, or as if in, an editorial." I am aware of the other definition of editorialize, "to inject personal interpretations or opinions into an otherwise factual account.", which may make the word seem negative to some. If someone thinks that violates WP:IMPARTIAL, we could change the word to "stated in an editorial" or "stated in an opinion piece". I am against using just the word "stated", though, because that gives the impression that the statement was a result of news reporting by the Arizona Republic, not an editorial. Per WP:RSEDITORIAL, editorials can only be used as primary sources for the authors' opinions, and must be clearly attributed as such. Liu1126 (talk) 10:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should replace the cited source with this one, which states more or less the same thing: "Thomas and Arpaio began to attack their political enemies, charging judges and county supervisors with crimes and filing a racketeering suit against them in federal court. All of those cases fell apart." Replacing the old source with this one should solve the problem. M.Bitton (talk) 15:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Perhaps M.Bitton's suggestion would resolve this. But for now, since this was responded to with objection by Liu1126 and a brief discussion, I'm marking this as responded-to and as needing consensus. -- Pinchme123 (talk) 02:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Andrew_Thomas_(American_politician)&oldid=1250085042"