Talk:David Wu/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Conflict with Goli Ameri

Reader Richard sent an e-mail citing the difference between this article and the Goli Ameri article.

"The Wikipedia articles on "David Wu" and "Goli Ameri" contradict each other.

The former says: "Ameri chose to barely discuss the issue in the last days of the campaign, a decision that many cited as a factor in her decisive loss."

The latter says: "Ameri heavily pushed the issue in the closing days of the campaign, which contributed to her loss in the election."

I changed the wording of this article to be consistent with this Portland Tribune article. [1]. Capitalistroadster 23:47, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't honestly know how you can "barely discuss" an issue. It sounds grammatically strange at best. Davidpdx 14:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

Is is apparent that user:143.231.249.141 has a conflict of interested based information on the user's webpage. If this is true, then this person is inside one of the House Buildings possibly as staffer of Congressman Wu or campaign worker. If that is the case, then they should not be editing this article. Davidpdx 02:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Information Regarding 2002 Election

Someone who is an unregistered user has removed a large portion of the article stating it doesn't belong there. I am challanging this asserting, in that it was a big news story, even though the end result didn't directly affect the election.

There has been some problems with candidates staff or campaigns making changes to articles that simply take out everything bad things only leaving the good stuff. Please post why you think it should be removed rather the reverting. Otherwise, I may begin to think it's simply Wu's campaign trying to whitewash the article. Davidpdx 11:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

First off, apologies -- it's been a while since I bothered to edit anything, and had to whip up a new username. I moved the details of Goli Ameri's strategy (and the results) to the Goli Ameri page, citing the reason that her political strategy belonged under her entry and not Wu's. I felt it was enough to mention (and link to) her page for the 2004 election. ew73 9:30, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I understand some of it could be thought of a strategy. Certainly we could par it down to just the fact that sexual assault allegation (I'm being careful not to say it was true because really it was never proven in court) and his apology and leave it at that. I also think the results from the third party candidate could be removed as well. Please let me know what you think. Davidpdx 21:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the reference belongs almost entirely on Ameri's article, as she was the one that made it an issue during the election. Perhaps something along the lines of "Ameri created some controversy with a sexual harassment allegation near the end of the 2004 election"? I'm hesitant to remove information on the 3rd party candidate unless it can be found (easily) somewhere else, but I've no strong feelings about it one way or another.Ew73 21:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll post what I'm recommending here on the talk page so you can see what I mean. Here is what is there now:

In the 2004 election, Wu was challenged by Goli Ameri, a Republican Iranian-American. On October 12, 2004, Congressman Wu admitted that he had been disciplined for attempted sexual assault by Stanford officials while a student at the school in 1976. Ameri was reluctant at first to campaign on the issue, but toward the end of the campaign focused on the issue heavily. This had little effect on the final outcome as Wu garnered 58% of the vote in the 2004 race, compared to Ameri's 38%, and 4% for Dean Wolf, the Constitution Party candidate.

What I propose is cutting it to this:

In the 2004 election, Wu was challenged by Goli Ameri, a Republican Iranian-American. On October 12, 2004, Congressman Wu admitted that he had been disciplined for attempted sexual assault by Stanford officials while a student at the school in 1976. Wu won the 2004 general election with 58% of the vote, compared to Ameri's 38%, and 4% for Dean Wolf, the Constitution Party candidate.

Since you said you had mixed feelings about taking the 3rd party candidate out, I went ahead and left it in. I think this is dramatically scaled back from what was there, but still leaves the fact that the alligations were made and he admitted to them. Can you see anything wrong with this? Davidpdx 14:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Nothing wrong in the information presented, no. It flows pretty poorly, though. How about:

In the 2004 election, Wu was challenged by Republican Goli Ameri. On October 12, 2004 after Ameri brought the issue to the forefront of her campaign, Wu admitted that he had been disciplined in 1976 for attempted sexual assault by Stanford officals while he was attending the school. Wu won the 2004 general election with 58% of the vote, compared to Ameri's 38%, and 4% for Deal Wolf, the Constitution Party candidate.

Reasoning (in order of changes) -- Ameri's heritige is spelled out quite clearly on her own article. The context for the admission by Wu is important. As you had it, it read like Wu ran against this Ameri person and oh yeah, he's a sexual predator. I don't like the election results there, but aside from creating a comprehensive "2004 Election Results" article, it's the best place, I guess.

Yeah, that makes sense to remove what her heritage is, because it really doesn't matter. That should tighten up the paragrapn pretty nice. I don't think he's a sexual predator, in fact it might even be worth it to reinforce the fact that charges were never brought against him.

By the way are you in Oregon. There are tons of other articles that need help in terms of Oregon politicans. I don't know if you have the time or not. I've been trying to fix some of them, but I haven't had much time lately.Davidpdx 00:09, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I went a head and updated the article, feel free to fiddle with it. And yeah, I'm in Oregon (Portland, actually). User:ew73 02:32, April 1, 2006 Ew73