Talk:Early political career of Sarah Palin/Archive 1

Archive 1

For deletion?

Is there a need for a separate page to cover this? Surely it should be dealt with under the main biographical page for Palin? Seems like unnecessary and unhelpful duplication to me. Is it one for deletion? Contaldo80 (talk) 08:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Its similar to the Governorship of Sarah Palin article. Little details that have no place in the main bio can go here and important things and a brief summary will go to the main article. Hobartimus (talk) 08:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to delete the "Previous experience" what-not because the entire section is unsourced.Reinoe (talk) 14:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Page for input on deletion of article : Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mayoralty_of_Sarah_Palin Theosis4u (talk) 22:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Restore text to main

A large portion of text which was discussed at length of the talk page of the main article was removed from the main page and moved here. I restored it back to the main article since this move was not discussed on the talk page first. Please discuss on talk before moving. -Classicfilms (talk) 10:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed the section on talk page for the main article that announced the creation of this article (didn't see it before). I made a note there as well. In any case, there should be discussion and consensus before moving material off of the main article. -Classicfilms (talk) 11:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

This talk page is editing for this article. It's no use to write anything here regarding the main article, this talk is not a valid discussion page for anything regarding the main article. If you make undiscussed changes to the main article and then point to here it will still be reverted as a no consensus change. Hobartimus (talk) 11:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually I was referring to an undiscussed change made to material that had been placed on the main page after a lengthy discussion on the talk page. And the discussion is happening there as well. Thanks for the tip, however. -Classicfilms (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Improve Page suggestions

Population of the town at time Palin was Mayor is missing.

This could be further expanded upon. Also Debt incurred by town during Palins administration is missing. --MisterAlbert (talk) 20:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

While this article meticulously cites references, it seems stacked to criticize Palin.

Reading through many of the 80 or so articles that refer to Palin in the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman's archives from the 1996 to 2002 period, local residents don't seem to have shared such a negative view. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI, all I did to create this article was copy the corresponding section of the Sarah Palin article. Then I proposed a draft summary section for the Sarah Palin article. I think you will find the draft summary section much closer to NPOV.Ferrylodge (talk) 04:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

It is very hard to insert any form of criticism of Palin , even crticism from John McCain for her earmark requests , without being cited for POV. The article is simply reporting the facts. She had some turbulent years as Mayor. --207.232.97.13 (talk) 04:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)fred

Take a look at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, in particular the "Undue weight" section. Most if not all the sentences in this article are neutral and referenced. Added all together and they present a very negative picture, one that's at odds with her electoral record and popularity in Wasilla as well as with the newspaper archive I linked to above. Yes, Palin encountered turbulence yet from this article you'd think that was all there was to her time as mayor. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Good Wiki Editing on The Page

By labelling the articles under sub titles it has cleaned up the page and made it very easy to read and follow.

Far better than the main Page. It is definitely a keeper. --207.232.97.13 (talk) 02:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Fred

Library Matters - Book Titles

This section should either remove the references of the specific books mention altogether OR last them in an ending paragraph that speak of those particle issues clearly drawing the line that Palin had nothing to do with those request. As it stands now, the middle paragraph clearly confuses the issue. Theosis4u (talk) 05:26, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

On second thought, the middle paragraph should just be removed all together as it doesn't address anything about Palin specifically. It could go in the Wasilla,_Alaska if you feel it's important to a cities history. Theosis4u (talk) 05:29, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The book Heather Has Two Mommies is specifically addressed in the cited Boston Globe article about Palin. It's clearly relevant. All the discussion about book-banning and book censorship sounds ridiculous if no bokks are mentioned. I'm not saying that specific books need to be mentioned in the main article, but why in the world shouldn't we mention one here? There was a specific complaint against that particular book during her tenure as mayor, and Palin decided to not join the complaint. Omitting that information makes Palin look more like a book-banner, which she apprently was not.Ferrylodge (talk) 15:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I definitely think the book titles are relevant. Otherwise people might wonder whether the fuss was about the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Lady Chatterly's Lover. Giving the actual book titles from reliable sources adds considerable value. We may not opine that the public comments at Wasilla Assembly of God at the time were related to Palin's hypothetical questions at the City Council meeting, but we should provide the sourced facts and let readers decide on their own if there is a connection.--Appraiser (talk) 16:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

IMO - the only relevance these books have in the article here is for others to setup a guilt by association and/or implied inference that Palin was inquiring about the issue because of the same-sex book of the books. Theosis4u (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I've clarified in the article that the Heather book was challenged in 1997, which was the year after Palin's public discussion about censorship. I think it's important to mention this book, because the cited source says it's notable, it seems to have been the most controversial book during Palin's tenure as mayor, and yet Palin accepted it. Just talking about censorship in abstract terms would be confusing to readers. I'm not even sure that merely objecting to book selection, or merely preferring that money be spent on a different book, is necessarily "censorship", but that's an argument for another day.Ferrylodge (talk) 18:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) That's a good change. I wasn't aware that the "Heather" book request came a year after the hypothetical questions in 1996. Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 19:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Library Matters - Firing

"Palin rescinded the firing of Emmons the next day after meeting with her and after what the Anchorage Daily News called "a wave of public support for Emmons." Palin stated that her concerns had been alleviated when Emmons agreed to support Palin's plan to merge the town's library and museum operations."

would be better as

Palin rescinded the firing of Emmons the next day after meeting with her, stating that her concerns had been alleviated when Emmons agreed to support Palin's plan to merge the town's library and museum operations. The Anchorage Daily News claimed that there was "a wave of public support for Emmons" as well.

It makes more sense to tie together palin's actions in the follow and then give the ADN summary as another possibility to Palin's own justification. Theosis4u (talk) 05:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

See WP:WTA. The word "claimed" is disfavored. Also, let's not consider this stuff in a vacuum. What do the cited sources say?Ferrylodge (talk) 15:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Your WP:WTA does address, imo, an acceptable use for claim in this context - the "witness" acceptable example. I'm not following you about your reference to sources? Theosis4u (talk) 18:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your proposed changes, I think we should follow whatever the cited sources say. What do they say?Ferrylodge (talk) 18:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Library Matters - The Wave

"Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship." writes Anne Kilkenny. Updated letter from Anne is on ADN. 100 people, is that even a ripple of a population of 5000+ ? I don't see how the "wave" can stay in there now that we actually have a number count by an eye witness and participant. Theosis4u (talk) 05:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The present article says: "Palin rescinded the firing of Emmons the next day after meeting with her and after what the Anchorage Daily News called 'a wave of public support for Emmons'". The Kilkenny quote does not mention the firing of Emmons, so you may be comparing apples to oranges. In any event, the ADN is a much more reliable source than what one individual citizen has said. (And, in a small city it doesn't take much to make a "wave".) I'd leave it the way it is. I wouldn't object to putting Kilkenny's "100" in a footnote if you like, provided it's also stated that Kilkenny did not mention the firing of Emmons here.Ferrylodge (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me getting 100 people to do something in a town that size is significant. I live in a town of 50,000, and I think a rally here of 100 would draw media attention.--Appraiser (talk) 16:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Police Matters - Rape Kits

This should be pulled until the request for public records can demonstrate how this could be a "Palin" topic. As the data stands now, it's a State of Alaska vs. cities within the state. "In 2000, there were 497 rapes reported in Alaska." and we don't have any records yet of the number of reported rapes in Wasilla through those years. If this was policy that Palin was aware of and made a decision to support or resist. The article mentions 10 days for the records request, so we should here some more about it within the week. Theosis4u (talk) 06:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I think this stuff should stay in this article for now, but not yet go in the main article. It's relevant to this article, because she's been accused of wanting victims to pay, and she's denied that she ever wanted victims to pay.Ferrylodge (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

This article from the Frontiersman paraphrases Chief Fannon, "Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams." It does not mention Palin, but Fannon was hired by Palin after she fired his predecessor. I also don't know whether Fannon was fired the day after this article was published or not, but that action certainly would have earned her points on my ledger. I think her presumed failure to disavow his statement is a significant (in)action of her mayorlty. And I can't believe that she wouldn't have been made aware of Fannon's mention in the newspaper, in a town of that size.--Appraiser (talk) 16:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Second term as mayor - Anne Kilkenny For $ sources?

Is there no better source than Anne (private citizen working mom who dislikes Palin) for the details in the first paragraph? Even if her numbers are right, it would makes sense to find another source for these details. Theosis4u (talk) 06:26, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this one? Palin "inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22-million." . It's sort of a fact check against the Anne numbers and gives context. Theosis4u (talk) 07:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Jossi found that source, as he said at the main article talk page. It needs to be used here at this article. Go for it, if you'd like, but plese make sure to include both the points and cuonterpoints.Ferrylodge (talk) 15:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Second term as mayor - Term limits

"In 2002, term limits prevented Palin from running for a third term as mayor." The fact Palin ran on term limits and then enacted them seems that a rewording is appropriate here. Recommend the following instead. <blockqoute> In 2002, the term limits that Palin helped to enacted prevented her from running for a third term as mayor.

Theosis4u (talk) 06:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

When exactly were the term limits enacted, and do we have a reliable source for it? If so, your suggestion sounds fine.Ferrylodge (talk) 15:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering that too, since her predecessor served 3 terms, I believe. Is there a source that says Palin advocated for term limits for mayor?--Appraiser (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

They were enacted during Palin's term. - "She defeated three-term incumbent mayor John Stein," -. We've also referenced term-limits as an issue of her platform. Wasilla just recently voted on removing mayoral term limits, it was defeated and term limits are still in effect. I've been unable to find a newspaper announcement on the election details of when Wasilla actual passed the initial term limit though. Theosis4u (talk) 23:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Rape

This article has recently been edited to say:

Fannon forwarded a budget to Palin, which in turn Palin approved and proposed to the city council, requiring rape victims to pay for for forensic medical examination necessary to gather evidence, which can cost $500 to $1200.

But that's not what the cited article says. The cited article says this:[1]

Despite the city's flush accounts, the police department under the chief Palin hired to replace Stambaugh required women who said they had been raped to pay for examination kits themselves, a policy Palin now says she rejects. State legislation passed a year later required the town to pay for the kits.

I will fix.Ferrylodge (talk) 02:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Duties

The new section on "duties" says that "The duties of a mayor of an Alaskan city are more circumscribed than those of cities in other states". However, the source says that the "universe of the mayor of Wasilla is sharply circumscribed even by the standards of small towns". So, the source does not say that the Wasilla situation is the same for other Alaskan cities. Also, the budget and # of employees has already been given later in the article. I will fix.Ferrylodge (talk) 03:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Redecorating

This article was recently edited to insert the following:

Palin redecorated her office, using $50,000 from a city highway fund. Nick Carney, a member of the Wasilla City Council, criticized Palin for not having obtained prior approval from the City Council, which he said was legally required. Palin responded, "I'm the mayor, I can do whatever I want until the courts tell me I can't."[2]

There are some problems with this. The cited source is Salon.com, which is not always a reliable source.[3] It is especially unreliable in this instance. The inserted material is completely based on recollections of a person named Nick Carney, without any corroboration. He was a Wasilla City Council member who sided with her opponent in the 1996 mayor's race. According to Salon, Carney says her office looked like a "bordello", he had an "acrimonious history with Palin", he says "she was vicious to the other girls" on her basketball team in school, "always playing up to the coach and pointing out when the other girls made mistakes," and Carney also says that "She rewards friends and cuts everyone else off at the knees." So, it's doubtful that Salon is a reliable source, and certainly Carney is not reliable and neutral. So, I'll remove the new material from this article, pending corroboration.Ferrylodge (talk) 23:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Why does Carney saying bad things about Palin mean that Carney is bad? Why does Salon saying what Carney said make Salon bad? These are not rhetorical questions. Please answer. Meh. Just noticed the date on this. Anarchangel (talk) 18:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

1997 support of hospital banning abortion

Being discussed at the main Sarah Palin page, I've copied and pasted: From the source in question:

Palin's former church and other evangelical denominations were instrumental in ousting members of Valley Hospital's board who supported abortion rights — including the governor's mother-in-law, Faye Palin.

Alaska Right to Life Director Karen Lewis, who led the campaign, said Palin wasn't a leader in the movement initially. But by 1997, after she had been elected mayor, Palin joined a hospital board to make sure the abortion ban held while the courts considered whether the ban was legal, Lewis said.

"We kept pro-life people like Sarah on the association board to ensure children of the womb would be protected," Lewis said. "She's made up of this great fiber of high morals and godly character, and yet she's fearless. She's someone you can depend on to carry the water."

In November 2007, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that because the hospital received more than $10 million in public funds it was "quasi-public" and couldn't forbid legal abortions.

My emphasis. Hope that helps. Regards. FangedFaerie (Talk | Edits) 03:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Broadening scope of article

I'd like to broaden the scope of this article, by re-naming it "Local government service of Sarah Palin." So, it would cover not just her Mayoralty, but also her prior service on the City Council. This would not expand the article's length much, since we don't have a lot of info about her days on the City Council, but it would allow us to include more detail about her days as City Coincillor than in the main Sara Palin article.Ferrylodge (talk) 21:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Mayoral succession

I removed a statement in the article (sourced to the New York Times) that Palin endorsed Keller over Faye Palin in the election to determine her successor. According to the book Trailblazer: An Intimate Biography of Sarah Palin by Lorenzo Benet (page 129), Sarah Palin did not endorse either candidate because she was close to both of them. Benet sources the Anchorage Daily News and witnesses for the claim. Kelly ^hi! 04:15, 15 February 2009 (UTC)