Talk:Political positions of Christopher Dodd

United States: Presidential elections Low‑importance

	United States portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

I wanted to include information from the deleted article, Political positions of Christopher Dodd in the campaign article, so it was undeleted but I never got around to adding it. I think the information in that article should be merged into this one. I'll try.--S TX 19:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to ask an admin to copy the deleted text to a user subpage. Also, any help you can provide with the lead here would be welcome. -- Kendrick7^talk 19:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just added some tags to this article and I would like to explain why. First up, I am sorry if I have upset anybody. What happened is that I saw that there is/was another article with an almost identical title which got deleted. That set alarm bells ringing. The style of the page was a big list and I read it initially as being in support of Dodd. I realise now that this is not the intention. I can't see any sense in "Political positions of..." articles about politicians. Surely their political positions should be key points of their main articles. That said, I didn't realise that other presidential candidates had similar articles so I guess the situation is more balanced than I thought, even if it seems silly to me. Maybe I was overzealous so, if the consensus is that my tags are wrong, I won't sulk if they are removed. May I suggest however, that the best thing to do would be to merge all the "political positions of..." articles into a single political positions matrix for the presidential candidates. I think that would be more use although it might also become the mother of all edit wars as the campaign goes on. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completed the merge and redirected the old article to this one.--S TX 20:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is a lot of the candidate articles are too long; I though the campaign article STX made was a little dry as far as presenting what Dodd was running about as opposed to just a where/when overview, so I figured a split would give a main article to be referenced from both the bio and campaign articles. There is a main article for all the Republican candidates like you propose in addition to all their candidate position sub-articles, but not one yet for the Dems. Anyway, STX doesn't particularly care for Dodd; as far as POV I would hope he can keep me honest. It's not as if I'm leaving out some secret plan Dodd has to invade Poland or anything. -- Kendrick7^talk 20:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can this be merged back to the Chris Dodd article?

Any objections?Hoponpop69 (talk) 06:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would make the biography way too long, in my opinion. -- Kendrick7^talk 18:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article currently is not even over Wikipedia:Article size.Hoponpop69 (talk) 18:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The combined size of the two is ~64KB, well over the recommended 10-30KB mentioned there. -- Kendrick7^talk 18:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main article doesn't need to be turned into a "political positions of..." article. It is more organized to keep the two articles separate.--S TX 18:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wait -- I didn't notice you had already combined them. It's still 36KB -- not a lot of room to grow on. You'd just be postponing an inevitable re-split somewhere down the line-- Kendrick7^talk 18:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well for what it's worth when I combined them it was 39 kilobytes too long.[1]Hoponpop69 (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering how this would postpone an inevitable resplit?Hoponpop69 (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Insomuch as a person's bio tends to grow over time as more events occur in their life. -- Kendrick7^talk 19:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

1. Dodd, Christopher J is the leading recipient of Campaign Contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. $133,900.00 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.77.1.126 (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

policies need to include education

what are his opinions on private schools and public schools? Is he for government monopolies in education or does he favor vouchers/ tax credits? Dodd went to private schools his whole life, do his policy views support other people who would like that option? 71.66.105.42 (talk) 11:50, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Political positions of Christopher Dodd. 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/20090606001330/http://www.courant.com/business/hc-dodd-credit-cards.artmay23,0,25650.story to http://www.courant.com/business/hc-dodd-credit-cards.artmay23,0,25650.story

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: 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) 17:31, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]