| Revision as of 13:34, 11 February 2015 editMrX (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers97,648 edits →Bush leaks all over Florida: comment← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 08:34, 11 November 2024 edit undoTom.Reding (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Template editors3,801,449 editsm →top: merge blp/living/activepol params into blp=activepolTag: AWB |
| (611 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=ap|style=long}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject banner shell |class=B |blp=activepol |listas=Bush, Jeb |1= |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Bush family|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography |politician-work-group=yes |politician-priority=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics |importance=Mid |American=yes |American-importance=mid}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Conservatism |importance=Low}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject United States |importance=Mid |USgovernors=yes |USgovernors-importance=low |USPE=yes |USPE-importance=High |TX=yes |TX-importance=Low |UTA=yes |UTA-importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Miami |importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Florida|importance = Mid}} |
|
⚫ |
}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{archive navigation}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{archive navigation}} |
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
|counter = 3 |
|
|counter = 4 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|algo = old(90d) |
|
|algo = old(90d) |
| Line 10: |
Line 20: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "Guac merchant" listed at ] == |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
|
] |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=B|politician-work-group=yes|listas=Bush, Jeb}} |
|
|
|
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect ]. The discussion will occur at ] until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] <sub> ]</sub> 04:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC) |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Conservatism|class=B|importance=Low}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=Low|TX=yes|TX-importance=Low|USgovernors=yes|USgovernors-importance=low|listas=Bush, Jeb|UTA=yes|UTA-importance=}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Miami|class=B|importance=High}} |
|
| ⚫ |
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== silly season can at least wait until announcements are made == |
|
|
|
|
|
The adding of trivia not considered important by major reliable sources is pretty useless and seems to be based on Misplaced Pages being a daily newspaper. It isn't. Wait until ''multiple major sources'' bring up actual issues before littering this BLP with trivia, please. ] (]) 12:35, 3 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:It's not trivial; it's biographical. Adding content about Bush's "troubled" times at Phillips Academy is perfectly fine, and probably necessary per ] , although it should be written in an encyclopedic tone. Here are some sources:<ref>http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/02/01/tumultuous-four-years-phillips-academy-helped-shape-jeb-bush/q6ccyHNOtP1n6kqDokMBfK/story.html</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/31/jeb-bush-smoked-marijuana_n_6585346.html|title=Jeb Bush Smoked Marijuana And Was A Bully In High School, Say Former Classmates|work=The Huffington Post}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-what-it-was-like-to-get-high-with-jeb-bush-2015-1|title=Here's what it was like to get high with Jeb Bush|date=30 January 2015|work=Business Insider}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/02/how-media-helped-sink-mitt-romney/|title=How the media helped sink Mitt Romney|author=Howard Kurtz|work=Fox News}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/jebs-past-vs-jebs-future|title=Jeb's past vs. Jeb's future|work=MSNBC}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aol.com/article/2015/01/31/jeb-bush-i-smoked-marijuana/21137500/|title=Jeb Bush: 'I smoked marijuana' - AOL.com|work=AOL Article}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://theweek.com/speedreads/536848/jeb-bushwas-pothead|title=Jeb Bush was a pothead|work=theweek.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/02/03/bold-or-bully-jeb-bushs-2016-image-problem|title=Bold or Bully?|work=U.S. News & World Report}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/1/inside-the-beltway-jeb-bush-inherits-the-mean-romn/|title=Inevitable: Jeb Bush inherits Mitt Romney’s media coverage|work=Washington Times}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/jeb-bushs-troubled-days-at-andover/2215824|title=Jeb Bush's troubled days at Andover|work=Tampa Bay Times}}</ref> |
|
|
{{reflist-talk}} |
|
|
:Perhaps someone would like to take a stab at adding a few sentences about this obviously notable material.- ]] 16:45, 3 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::There's already content there: 'Following in the footsteps of his father and older brother George, Jeb attended high school at the Massachusetts boarding school Phillips Academy. Though he received poor grades at first and occasionally smoked marijuana, Bush made the honor roll by the end of his senior year.'] (]) 16:56, 3 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::There is ''some'' content there, but it's rather poorly written. I would hope that we could come up with something a little better than a compliment sandwich. Also, I think it would be great if we could find sources to expand the early years section, as it's a little sparse. Unfortunately, my HighBeam subscription expired so I'm somewhat limited in what I would be able to find. When I have a chance I will try to come up something that might work better than the two sentences above.- ]] 18:58, 3 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Bush leaks all over Florida == |
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jeb_Bush&oldid=646545260&diff=prev |
|
|
|
|
|
Pick a ref, any ref... |
|
|
|
|
|
* http://www.gq.com/blogs/the-feed/2015/02/jeb-bush-email-leaks-florida.html |
|
|
* http://www.cnbc.com/id/102414247 |
|
|
* http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/02/10/uh-oh-jeb-bushs-transparency-effort-also-exposed-florida-residents-personal-data/ |
|
|
|
|
|
Which do you consider a reliable source? ] (]) 22:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Actually the source for the unredacted copies is ... the State of Florida. Bush released nothing not already available. "Asked for comment, a Bush spokesperson Kristy Campbell said that the emails are an “exact replica” of those on public record that are available at the Florida Department of State and are “available at anyone’s request under Chapter 119 sunshine laws.”'' ] (]) 23:15, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:Actually |
|
|
:{{talkquote|"But some messages were personal appeals that included intimate details of people’s lives, medical and employment information, and even Social Security numbers – none of which were redacted, according to BuzzFeed News, which perused eight years’ worth of emails."|source=}} |
|
|
:- ]] 23:27, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From CSM: ''Indeed, most of Mr. Bush’s emails came with a disclaimer: “Most written communications to or from state officials regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.”'' due to Florida State law. Cheers. ] (]) 23:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:I suggest we stick to concise facts rather than selective quotes that simply make Bush appear righteous. By the way, the state does not bulk publish emails. Bush on the other hand did.- ]] 00:10, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*Why is this sentence notable? Seems trivial to me.--] ]</font> 00:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::Do you consider the CSM fact to be an attempt to "make Bush appear righteous"? Or the simple statement of fact that people knew in advance that the emails were not secret? ] (]) 00:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I don't care. Why is it notable? How does it add to the articles encyclopedic value?] ]</font> 00:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Indeed. And roughly two thirds of the content now in our article attempts to excuse the release of the emails, while the weight given to this material in our sources is about one third. Also, writing that CSM "noted" is blatantly ]. Thus, the POV tag.- ]] 00:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::"Noted" is not "weasel" when dealing with a ''statement of simple fact''. In the case of the Christian Science Monitor, they have a very high reputation for statements of fact. If you did not feel so, you would have removed the very same source from the BLP already, I trust. ] (]) 01:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Incorrect. In fact, it's one of the big, bold examples in ]. The word we should use is "stated" or "said" or "wrote". Better yet, we should leave the quote out altogether.- ]] 01:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::"Noted" is bad for opinions, good for facts. Change it to "stated" if you wish - seems ok either way from here. ] (]) 01:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::I disagree. It's not neutral as it lends undue emphasis to what follows it.- ]] 02:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
'''Riddle Me This''', How does anything in that entire paragraph have anything to do about the section it is placed into? The section is labeled 2016 Presidential Election, but this has nothing to do with the election at all. Nor is any of it, and I'm talking about the entire paragraph, notable at all. Can anyone explain why this is notable?] ]</font> 01:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::The entire section is riddled with POV according to the tag. Dunno anything else. ] (]) 01:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::You mean that you don't know its notable? Why are you trying to add something to the article in which you have no idea it's notability?] ]</font> 01:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Mr. Bush released the emails because he is running for president in 2016.- ]] 01:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::So? Why is it notable? Who cares why he did it. What lasting notability does it have to the man's entire life?--] ]</font> 02:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::It's notable because it's unprecedented, especially for a presidential candidate. Also because CNN, ABC, CSM, Yahoo, Huffington Post, Chicago Sun Times, Politico, USA Today, Minneapolis Star Tribune, MSNBC, New York Times, Tampa Bay Tribune, Slate, Breitbart, Chicago Daily Herald, International Business Times, Boomberg, NBC, Daily Mail, Newsweek, Time, The Atlantic, Washington Times and Washington Post thought it worthy of some ink.- ]] 02:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Where does it state that its unprecedented? Is he the first person ever to release emails? Good Grief, this just looks like the normal Misplaced Pages build up to the elections to try and use Misplaced Pages to paint political candidates in certain lights. Sigh. But of course we all can't conveniently lose our emails, like the IRS did.--] ]</font> 03:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Correct. I had to treat it as "notable" because two editors pretty much ''insisted'' it was important. But in the great scheme of things, it is about as important as what Bush has for breakfast in the run-up to silly season. ] (]) 13:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Notability, but more importantly, ] is determined by the extent of coverage in reliable source (please let me know if you disagree). I have listed a very large number of diverse sources that have covered this. I'm a little shocked that a release of 300,000 emails by U.S. presidential candidate and former governor is characterized as unimportant.- ]] 13:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== the neutral version? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2022 == |
|
I suggest: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Jeb Bush|answered=yes}} |
|
::''In 2015 Bush published the emails from his governorship online, exposing private details of employees and constituents. Most of the emails were public records under Florida's sunshine laws, but may included unredacted personal details like social security numbers.'' |
|
|
|
The reference to T. William Fair should be to T. Willard Fair. ] (]) 14:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
: {{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 19:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Bio seems biased == |
|
was not as neutral as the current version. ] (]) 01:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...licked clean, controlled, barely any mention of Jeb Bush´s deeply unethical "business" behaviors including lying abouot it (Miguel Recarey Medicare fraud scandal)- or rather covered up with miles of irrelevant text. ] (]) 20:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
:Why not? It explains what happened, that the release was (probably) lawful, and that personal details were revealed. What more needs to be said?- ]] 01:11, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::It says "exposed", uses poor grammar, and the number of SSNs is unknown -- yet the implication is made that a great many had them and that they were not ''told'' the emails were public records. As the governor's Contact page ''explicitly'' tells people about the law, that omission is pretty bad. Cheers. ] (]) 01:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::So change "exposing" to "revealing"; tweak the grammar; and leave the rest alone. " Most of the emails were public records under Florida's sunshine laws," includes any disclosures on any state owned website. Mentioning that additional detail tips the POV scales way off balance.- ]] 01:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2023 == |
|
== Early career == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Jeb Bush|answered=yes}} |
|
Two of the sub-headings in this section have the word "experience". I think this should be changed, it sounds a bit CV-ish. ] (]) 09:41, 11 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
] (]) 23:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
Need to mention he is known for “low energy”. |
|
|
:Says who? Do you have ], ] to support such a claim? --] (]) 23:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC) |
...licked clean, controlled, barely any mention of Jeb Bush´s deeply unethical "business" behaviors including lying abouot it (Miguel Recarey Medicare fraud scandal)- or rather covered up with miles of irrelevant text. Wuerzele (talk) 20:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Guac merchant. The discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 6#Guac merchant until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Talk 04:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Done