Jump to content

Talk:Rob McKenna

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

Page naming

[edit]

This should have a straightforward disambiguation page, not a direct reference for a minor character from a work of science fiction.--BradPatrick 15:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay marriage quote

[edit]

This quote has been added back on the page for a multitude of good reasons. For one, gay marriage is a hotly debated topic across the country, even in so-called 'progressive' Washington state. McKenna is currently a standout in Washington's 2012 gubernatorial election, which means this information is even more important now than it was before.

One member who deleted the source claimed that The Advocate was just an 'advocacy group.' However, this newsmagazine is very established, respected and has been in print for over 55 years. It certainly meets the qualification for a reliable source. Anybody who would disagree should pick up an issue of the magazine.

Additionally, the 'unqualified source' the article cites leads back to The Seattle Times, the original article of which has also been cited in the main article. The wording in the article from The Seattle Times has the exact same wording as it does in The Advocate. You might be able to say The Advocate is unworthy of citing, but I'm sure you'd be hard pressed to say the same thing about The Seattle Times...

Finally, I do recognize that the source in this article is in a bit of a weird location. The 'personal' heading seems like the best location to me, but if anyone wishes to move it, I don't have a problem with that. As I said before, it might be best to move the source under a new heading called 'issues', or something of that nature. However, the importance of this quote is undeniable. It needs to be on this article, plain and simple. It is not in any way a BLP issue. This is McKenna's own opinion, one he seems to no have a problem with having. This information is not privacy sensitive or sensationalist in any nature if the words came directly from his mouth, which seems to be the case here. Please respond to this talk page before you make any decisions to deleted the source.

131.191.9.20 (talk) 22:15, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find the original Seattle Times article? TomPointTwo (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, I just read the Seattle Times article and, as I suspected, that is mostly defiantly not what McKenna said. The quotes provided by Advocate were not just inaccurate, they are actually downright deceptive. MacKenna, criticized a specific legal brief as being flawed as possibly opening the door to marriage between immedaite family and polygamists, he said nothing about "marriage equality for gays" leading to incest and polygamy. TomPointTwo (talk) 23:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that's EXACTLY what it says. "The other Republican candidate, King County Councilman Rob McKenna, criticized the ruling's wording as too broad and said its argument that there is no compelling state interest to deny marriage to two people in a committed relationship could leave marriage open to blood relatives or those practicing polygamy. 'It threatens to destroy all standards we apply to the right of marriage,' he said."
The wording might be different, but the idea is the same. He criticized a bill to expand marriage rights. By criticizing the bill with this language, he's also criticizing the concept. Unless I'm completely misunderstanding the source. If so, please explain how you interpret it. The wording of how this source is stated in the article can be changed, but I think the source needs to stay. And thanks for deleting the source before I had a chance for rebuttal. That was professional of you...
131.191.9.20 (talk) 01:51, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, here is a link to the Advocate article: [1] and the original source it is quoting, from the Seattle Times [2]. 131.191.9.20 (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed this on the 3rd Opinion page. I don't think the Advocate can be used as a source since it is quoting a blogger, not McKenna. The Seattle Times article is usable source, however I think there may be a question relating to WEIGHT. While the McKenna quote is accurate, he explicitly indicated that his personal view would not impact on his role as AG, and that nor would other contenders' opposite personal opinions impact on their capacity to act as AG. So while the edit is accurate, it does not paint a balanced picture of the situation in my view.MissionNPOVible (talk) 02:30, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How about this as a compromise:

In 2004 McKenna was reported as being personally opposed to gay marriage but did not believe views for or against gay marriage were relevant to the role of Attorney General. MissionNPOVible (talk) 05:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, because that's not what he said. Nothing in the Seattle Times article said McKenna was referencing the idea of gay marriage, it clearly established he was referencing a particular legal argument that he feared would establish precedent for the concerns above due to it's broad language. That's not the same thing. WP:BLP clearly takes precedence here. TomPointTwo (talk) 15:58, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In 2004 McKenna was reported as personally opposing the wording of same-sex marriage laws, but did not believe views for or against same-sex marriage were relevant to the role of Attorney General. MissionNPOVible (talk) 22:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I think this is just silly. If the man brings up polygamy and incest when talking about a same-sex marriage law, he's obviously not gay marriage's best friend. Suggesting that this law would open the doors for such things is preposterous and obviously comes from a man with a heterosexist viewpoint. Why don't we just cite what the article says directly and let readers interpret what it means? His views on same-sex marriage might not be relevant for his role as AG, but they will certainly be relevant as governor. 131.191.9.20 (talk) 21:41, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also think we might be disregarding the second part of the quote. He said, "It threatens to destroy all standards we apply to the right of marriage." What else could 'it' be but same-sex relations? Given the location of the quote in the article, I sincerely doubt he is giving his opinion on anything else.131.191.9.20 (talk) 21:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sympathetic to your view 131.191.9.20, but it's not for us to doubt or interpret, but just to report what the RS's say. TomPointTwo is correct that the source doesn't specify that he was opposed to gay-marriage, which is why I think the second version is more accurate. If you can find a RS that connects the importance of his personal views with his ambitions for being governor then that would be absolutely relevant and appropriate to include. MissionNPOVible (talk) 22:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How about we just agree to cite the article directly? No interpretation, just include the quote and let the readers decide. Regardless of what the quote specifically says, I don't think anyone can doubt that the quote is important. 131.191.9.20 (talk) 05:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that may be ok, but we need to be careful about WP:WEIGHT. A long quote would be inappropriate in my view, and I'm not sure this would be short. If you could find other RS's about this then I'd be much more comfortable about including the entire quote. MissionNPOVible (talk) 05:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Rob McKenna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Rob McKenna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rob McKenna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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: 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Rob McKenna. 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: 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) 12:07, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rob_McKenna&oldid=1208925083"