Talk:Todd Rokita/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Hoosiers for Rokita Editing Article

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It seems that a user with IP 24.172.172.138 is making edits to the article that are favorable of Mr. Rokita. This IP is in use by Hoosiers for Rokita, according to it's whois record. There's nothing wrong with this, but thought it should be pointed out. 99.57.5.178 (talk) 22:35, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I decided to try and re-balance the article, as previously noted it was written in a way favourable to Rokita, this is an encyclopedia not a republican profile page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.123.149.202 (talk) 12:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Controversies/Trivia

Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I believe the addition of the apparent sexist remarks to the controversy section is correct. It was an event big enough to make news in the UK. By stating it is trivial but having no problem with the other information within the controversy section you are suggesting sexism is trivial compared with racism. This is incorrect and so i will edit the article to reflect this. If you have a reason other than "it seems trivial to me" for removing it then please respond before removing the content — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.1.151.16 (talk) 10:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Its not that i find sexism or racism trivial, its that i think the mere fact that some politician said something stupid does not rate an edit to Wikipedia. Frankly, id just as soon remove both entries in the controversies section as they are both media driven minutiae. To me this is a form of recentism, the padding out of articles with details that are of no import, but briefly appear in the news cycle. Will this seem relevant in ten years? I really doubt it. Bonewah (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I entered the controversy about the sexist remark because the Congressman's remarks were so blatantly sexist (not one remark but at least two, beauty and age) that it establishes a pattern of behaviour. He evidently did not learn from his racist remarks of several year ago. This indicates a deep character flaw. What's next for him, homophobia, religious/ethnic attacks against Jews or Muslims, something else? I agree that it should not be placed in the lead paragraph so the placement in the controversies section appears to be a good compromise. Deleting both controversies is not appropriate. They exist(ed), are well documented, were widely reported, and indicate a reoccurring pattern of behaviour.Segalla (talk) 09:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Nothing you have said addresses my concerns. The fact that someone said something on TV once does not make it relevant. I think you are showing quite a bit of bias with your claims that this "indicates a deep character flaw" and "indicate a reoccurring pattern of behaviour". Our job is not to psychoanalyze the subject but rather to write an encyclopedic biography. I do not feel that a single remark rises to the level of inclusion in a biography and you have done nothing to change my mind. Bonewah (talk) 15:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Your concerns are unclear. My post said nothing about the personality of the Congressman, only the facts of an internationally televised interview concerning a historic event where he used sexist commentary to divert the journalist's questions. Really, we can go back and forth all day, week, month, or year on this. You have not articulated any consistent reason to exclude the text. So I will undo your edit of my edit or your edit of my edit ....Segalla (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Todd Rokita. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 05:00, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Todd Rokita. 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) 23:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)