User talk:Jmbarr

Re: Doug Duncan

Some text was copied and pasted from http://www.dougduncan.com/about, and, since it is his campaign site, I am assuming the information is copyrighted and is not free to reuse. Also, the additions were very heavily biased in favor of Duncan. Wikipedia must retain a neutral point of view. --tomf688 (talk - email) 02:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

They would have to be willing to completely release restrictions on their text. Their text must be useable for commercial purposes and must be allowed to be altered. You are free to email them to ask for permission.

As to the material you introduced being biased, it was quite obvious that it was from a pro-Duncan site. I'm not saying he is a bad guy or anything, but there were far too many words that give him more credit than is due (as is true for every politician's biography). For example, one such sentence in your additions states "Since his election in 1994 as Montgomery's top Democrat, Duncan has provided hands-on leadership to improve educational excellence, strengthen environmental protections, fight poverty and urban blight, and position Montgomery as an international biotechnology leader." This should be restated to conform to a neutral point of view. Something along the lines of "Since his election as County Executive, Duncan's agenda has included programs to aid the county education system and address local concerns regarding the environment and poverty." Another plus would be to add arguments from a reputable news magazine, such as the Washington Post or the New York Times. Just an example. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, be sure to sign your comments with ~~~~ so people know who is making the comments without having to search the page history. Furthermore, Wikipedia holds editors to a high standard, and accusing me of having a political agenda is not necessary or welcome. Thanks. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)