Jump to content

Talk:Jay Obernolte/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

karateka/martial artist category

I removed these categories based on what is stated here [1]. I'm not seeing evidence that he meets WP:MANOTE or derives a significant part of his income from martial arts. His efforts (and income) seem to be based on being a politician and running a video game company. Martial arts merely receives a passing mention in the article. Papaursa (talk) 04:11, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Papaursa: He did own a martial arts studio [2] (is that what their are even called?) which would have brought him income however having a black belt isn't required to own a gym. Meatsgains (talk) 19:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Technically, a karateka would call it a dojo, but your wording is fine. I did notice he lists it under interests instead of employment and it seems like it might be difficult to say it provides a "signifcant" portion of his income--given his other activities. I don't mind it being mentioned in the article, it's just that he doesn't seem to meet the requirements for the category (like playing pick-up basketball doesn't qualify one for the same category as LeBron). Papaursa (talk) 04:08, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. Let's just keep a brief mention in the article but leave out the category. That seems adequate. Meatsgains (talk) 18:31, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Recent expansion

I've updated Obernolte's page with his activity during his first two years in office since, from the looks of it, he is going to be elected for a second term. I've added several new subsections covering Assembly Bills he has authored, caucuses he was elected to serve on, taxes he opposes, etc. My question is, does each paragraph warrant its own subsection? While notable in and of itself, I'm not sure if we should keep each subsection as its own or combine them all together into one section. Meatsgains (talk) 02:42, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Sources

This article is way too reliant on primary sources for claims about his life. Please either remove or back them with reliable, secondary sources (newspapers, magazines, sources with editorial credibility). I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response czar 17:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jay Obernolte. 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) 03:34, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Jay Obernolte/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 12:01, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I intend to start this review shortly. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:01, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    No glaring grammar or spelling problems. I made a few minor tweaks for clarity, but otherwise this is ok. Should lose the citations in the lede.
    Article references the "High Desert" and doesn't explain the term. Article references "the fire tax" but doesn't explain what that is. Article references membership in the "Young Eagles" but doesn't explain what that is or why it matters. The article should provide context for these at least briefly so non-Californian readers understand.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    Minor quibbles: Citations 2 & 6 are duplicates. The FarSight Studios website is not a reliable source for what their most popular games were. Lede states that FarSight launched 1988, body says 1990.
    The entire Violence Against Public Safety Officers Deterrence Act section is a huge problem. It is almost entirely copied from the San Bernardino Sun website, without quotation marks ([3]). First, this is a copyvio problem, and second, even if it weren't, the lack of quotes presents the writing of the op-ed as though it were fact. I have removed the section and revdel'd the diffs that contained it; it should not be re-added unless properly quoted.
    The California budget section is mostly quotes and what isn't is also either straight copy-vio or so closely paraphrased it's the same thing. Really, really unacceptable. I should fail this right here given that it's the second such section. Instead, I have re-worded and trimmed it.
    In the paragraph about aviation under "personal life", the article states that "He worked with Embraer as a member on its Pilot Advisory Board during the development of the Phenom 300" and provides four citations for this. The first is paywalled and should at least quote a portion that supports this assertion. The second states that he owns a Phenom 300, but fails to mention any advisory board. The third is a membership profile from a local jet group and not a reliable source. The fourth again fails to mention any advisory board. This either needs removed or properly cited. Actually, the rest of the aviation paragraph's claims about his licensing & so on also need to be reliably cited as they presently aren't.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    I don't know that the veterans section is relevant to the scope of the article, unless Obernolte is specifically noted for his work with veterans. The Assembly awards "Veteran of the Year" to someone in every district every year, so this is basically trivia. Same with renaming a stretch of highway, honestly, unless it's part of a broader focus for him on veterans. Should be removed entirely or expanded enough to justify inclusion as within scope.
    The section about minimum wage is basically just a blockquote. The quote should be trimmed, and if possible, the section should include referenced information about actions that Obernolte has taken about the wage increase. If he hasn't, perhaps it could be folded into a general "political views" section along with other opinions.
    The Frontier Communications is another op-ed quote. It provides zero context - what did Frontier do that caused Obernolte to be so disturbed that he had to write an op-ed about it? Did Obernolte take any legislative action about it? Should either be expanded on its own merits or folded into a general "views" section.
    Also applies to the paragraph on his opposition to Xavier Becerra. Again, blockquote. Could be trimmed and folded.
    On the whole the article should be refactored focus on concrete actions that Obernolte has taken (like authoring legislation). Opinions and views without accompanying action should be trimmed and placed in a "political views" section in order to clearly differentiate them. Every politician expresses opinions; it is the point of being a politician. They are essentially trivia unless they were followed by action, or a significant public reaction for some reason.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Although it does not use overtly promotional language, the extensive coverage and quotations of Obernolte's views and op-eds as noted above gives the casual skimmer the impression that he has accomplished quite a bit more than he actually has, by virtue of expanding the table of contents with active-sounding headers. Falls somewhat afoul of NPOV by being puffery, in my opinion.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Meatsgains, this needs a lot of work before it can be considered a Good Article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:51, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


Orphaned references in Jay Obernolte

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Jay Obernolte's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CAgenr":

  • From Jimmy Gomez: "November 3, 2020, General Election - United States Representative" (PDF). California Secretary of State. Retrieved January 28, 2021.
  • From 2020 United States House of Representatives elections in California: "November 3, 2020, General Election – United States Representative" (PDF). California Secretary of State. Retrieved December 22, 2020.
  • From 2020 United States House of Representatives elections: "U.S. House of Representatives Results of All Districts". California Secretary of State. Retrieved December 5, 2020.
  • From 2020 California State Assembly election: "November 3, 2020, General Election-State Assembly" (PDF). California Secretary of State. Retrieved December 22, 2020.

Reference named "SoSPrimary":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Jay Obernolte

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Jay Obernolte's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CAgenr":

Reference named "SoSPrimary":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jay_Obernolte/Archive_1&oldid=1061022092"