User talk:Acham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Acham, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Siva1979Talk to me 16:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Unnecessary Bios
Acham, please try to use the preview button more often, it often helps. Also, dont forget to make your talk page so others can know more about you and what articles they may find you writing on Wikipedia. Additionally, make sure that all bios are professional and if a page is deleted, do not redo it- with a few extenuating circumstances. DTfromDC 23:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] hurst article
Acham, I appologize for my grumpiness. ill help you on that article when i get some time. good luck with it. there may be a broken link on [[moran]'s page for hurst as well. just remember , no origional research. dtfromdc
[edit] Jen Safavian
Acham, I noticed your post on Jen Safavian. Although I know that it does list her as the chief counsel, that is false. I was down at that committee 3 times last week alone and I personally know a good deal of the staffers in that committee from meeting them at different political functions. She isn't at the bottom; however, she isn't the chief counsel(She never was to this date either). She is one of twelve according to the Committee on Government Reform.
+ Thanks; I see that now here. That means her bio is incorrect. I'll fix it. If I'm not fast enough, feel free to do so. Thanks for letting me know. Acham 15:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deleting comments of others on an article's talk page
Acham - I've restored the comments you deleted at Talk:Thomas M. Davis. I'm assuming that either (a) this was an inadvertent mistake, or (b) you intended to archive them but didn't complete the process.
If you did intend to delete the text, please let me know why. Thanks. John Broughton 20:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I intended to archive them because a note was displayed that the comment page was too long. I was thinking that the comments would archive like page edits and I could just go to an older version. I'll spend more time on the instuctions before I try that again. Thanks for the chance to explain.Acham 06:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- You're welcome. You're right that older comments are still available via an older version of the talk page, but that isn't considered a good way for someone looking for old comments to find them (or even to know they are there). Rather: Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page (a misleading title, in my opinion: it should be "How to archive part of a talk page"). John Broughton 14:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please unblock
[edit] Gov Reform Committee
Acham, lets come to an agreement on what is acceptable for the Gov. Reform Committee on Tom Davis.
" He became the Chairman in 2003. Previous to becoming the chair of the full committee, Davis was the chair of a subcommittee until 2002 when he stepped down after a series of legislative victories. As Chair of the Government Reform Committee, since 2004, he has led a total of 256 hearings which resulted in saving US taxpayers 6.5 billion dollars. [1]"
What parts of that are not suitable? They are all facts and describe how he came to be the chair. I know its not what the Washington Post suggested in their article, but because he was chair of the sub-committee is how he came to be in line.DTfromDC 01:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- DT - without taking sides here, a press release from the office of Tom Davis is an acceptable source for when he became chair, and the number of hearings held. But as for "series of legislative victories" and "saving US taxpayers 6.5 billion dollars", those need something meeting WP:V criteria; the word of Tom Davis or his staff isn't acceptable. The second claim COULD be kept in by saying "which he said resulted in saving ... "; his making the claim is newsworthy. (I wouldn't suggest a similar approach for the first situtation: wording like this is just too weird: "after what he said were a series of legislative victories". John Broughton | Talk 12:49, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with above; this is a Davis press release. (1) "After a series of legislative victories" is all PR. Even if he did have a string of victories, which he is NOW distancing himself from, by the way, what were they? What constitues a "series" -- 2? (2) As to the number of hearings and the savings, Davis has held fewer hearings than any previous chair, so that number of 256 without a denominator is meaningless. The Democrats on his committee have a list of almost 60 hearings on their wesbsite they have asked him to start. Finally, the savings is a number without serious support. How much did he WASTE by refusing Waxman's requests to hold hearings on Oil companies, Katrina contractors, Iraq, at the other 56 hearings they requested? A story in the Post on Sunday mentions a Unisys contract that is subject to Davis oversight that is overspending by $1 Billion. Katrina cost $100 Billion. Iraq spending is at $338 Billion. Can we subtract those numbers from his self-serving claims?
If you have something you want to put in your own words, please propose it.
[edit] Andrew Hurst
User:Thadeus856/templates/badlink
[edit] Copyright violation
Please do not copy and paste text that is copyrighted, as you did with Benjamin Holman. Your contributions must be in your own words. Thank you. BuddingJournalist 01:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for your help
I did attribute it. But I was too tired to re-write it. Hopefully it is a good start.Acham 06:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Andrew Hurst nominated for deletion
The article which you began on Andrew Hurst has been nominated for deletion. You might want to join the discussion. --Kevin Murray 21:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
