Talk:Green River City Council
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Neutral Point of View edit
There does not seem to be a NPOV in this article. It focuses mainly upon criticism of the city council, and I suspect that the article was created specifically for that purpose. There is probably not enough neutral information in this article for it to live on its own (and should be merged back to Green River, Wyoming, but I'm willing to let it grow for a while, assuming that the criticisms get removed or better supported with sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CosmicPenguin (talk • contribs) 20:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- What sources would you like to see for the criticisms? It could possibly be better to move this article to the main city article, but that doesn't escape the fact that the city council has received more criticism than good. If such material praising the city council were to be added, would this change the NPOV? If thats so, I can certainly find some good things the city council of Green River has done. I used sources both directly from the city's website and the local paper's comments on the issues. I'm not sure if these provide enough, but they are references nonetheless. Milonica (talk) 01:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- City councils (in fact, all of government) is defined by the things they do wrong, not the things they do right. Its clear that city leaders must be doing something right - the police and fire are still working, and the trash is being picked up. Despite their miscues, there hasn't been a widespread effort to recall the mayor or the city council. So they've been criticized. What government entity hasn't? That said, its not bad to leave in major controversies, such as the smoking ban, which is obviously well sourced and notable. But my problem with the article is that it was chiefly created to criticize the city council under the guise of describing it. Compare and contrast this with something like Government of New York City. This is what I would do to fix up the article:
- Expand the first section - describe the makeup of the city council - describe the wards in more detail.
- I would remove the first and third paragraphs of the "Criticism" section. The third has the most serious bias, including Some of the city council members own businesses, and potentially have created conflicts of interest in regards to new businesses in the city. Unsourced comments to that effect are possible WP:BLP violations. I doubt that public comments at a council meeting are reliable sources, especially when they infer inappropriate actions on the part of the council (Some of the residents complained that even though they were business owners themselves, there was such a concept a competition, and the city (or council members themselves) were potentially afraid of new growth). Again, this is getting close to WP:BLP. If there are reliable sources that detail these associations, those would a suitable replacement.
- That should get it pretty close to neutral - though I'm still not convinced there isn't anything here that could just be listed on the main Green River, Wyoming page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CosmicPenguin (talk • contribs) 03:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- City councils (in fact, all of government) is defined by the things they do wrong, not the things they do right. Its clear that city leaders must be doing something right - the police and fire are still working, and the trash is being picked up. Despite their miscues, there hasn't been a widespread effort to recall the mayor or the city council. So they've been criticized. What government entity hasn't? That said, its not bad to leave in major controversies, such as the smoking ban, which is obviously well sourced and notable. But my problem with the article is that it was chiefly created to criticize the city council under the guise of describing it. Compare and contrast this with something like Government of New York City. This is what I would do to fix up the article:
- If you like, you can make the edits you described above as well, I have no problem removing the items that could potentially be violations. I will continue to improve the first section of the article as well, but would like to leave the smoking ban part, since it did cause quite a stir in Green River. I know, I lived there through it. As far as moving this article to the main page, how about a description of the council's duties and such and just the one paragraph about smoking, fixed of course. The rest of it can be deleted, including this sub-page itself, again, I have no problems what-so-ever with that. I don't currently have time to make all of the changes, but I will continue working on this article to make it more neutral. 65.113.235.130 (talk) 05:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC) This last comment was actually made by me: Milonica (talk) 05:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC) since I forgot to log in.
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on City Council of Green River, Wyoming. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071023211803/http://www.cityofgreenriver.org/pages/2 to http://www.cityofgreenriver.org/pages/2
- Added archive https://archive.is/20130124231509/http://www.greenriverstar.com/articles/2007/12/05/news/news1.txt to http://www.greenriverstar.com/articles/2007/12/05/news/news1.txt
- Added archive https://archive.is/20130124220349/http://www.greenriverstar.com/articles/2007/12/20/news/news2.txt to http://www.greenriverstar.com/articles/2007/12/20/news/news2.txt
- Added
{{dead link}}tag to http://www.cityofgreenriver.org/minutes/view/178 - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090426053003/http://www.cityofgreenriver.org/minutes/view/188 to http://www.cityofgreenriver.org/minutes/view/188
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) 08:22, 8 August 2017 (UTC)