Wikipedia Editors: Help w/ this section!

[DeadheadForPaul]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul#Civil_liberties

I think it does a poor job of explaining the controversy

It needs to mention that he would not repeal the ADA nor every campaigned on anything remotely related to the CRA or ADA

Don't let the section get TOO big though

 

[DaisyFL]

Remove that stuff.

 

[Depressed Liberator]

I am a former admin of Wikipedia. Please do not vandalize the article in any way. Remove POV if you see it fit, but certainly do not add any.

 

[MRoCkEd]

Change this back to what it was please

 

[Jeremy]

Those issues have nothing to do with civil liberties. If someone wants to make a section about private property, they can be put there.

 

[Jeremy]

I am a former admin of Wikipedia. Please do not vandalize the article in any way. Remove POV if you see it fit, but certainly do not add any.

see my comments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rand_Paul#Civil_Liberties_Section

 

[Depressed Liberator]

see my comments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rand_Paul#Civil_Liberties_Section

Well as I mentioned, if you feel that there is POV (I do too, don't get me wrong here), please go ahead and fix it. I would, but I am kind of busy at work and stuff. It's the main reason why I had to take an indefinite leave as an admin.

 

[libertybrewcity]

I didn't write that section but I was the editor that added it to the Civil Liberties column. You can't just simply delete information from wiki unless it is a clear point of view violation. I changed the 'positions' section that made Rand quite extreme to a list of issues. The wiki community is all about give and take. You can add what you want to make him look better, but there are ten more editors that want to make Rand look as crazy and extreme as possible. So we can add information to make Rand look good, but we can completely change correct information.

If you want to rework the section, you can make some changes and then send them to me to change. Or my other suggestion would be to state Rand's position on civil liberties in regards to Patriot Act and individual rights and make a separate section on the way bottom titled "Civil Rights Controversy". That way, people will see a less 'extreme' position, and then we can hope that most people don't scroll to the bottom.

 

[DeadheadForPaul]

I didn't write that section but I was the editor that added it to the Civil Liberties column. You can't just simply delete information from wiki unless it is a clear point of view violation. I changed the 'positions' section that made Rand quite extreme to a list of issues. The wiki community is all about give and take. You can add what you want to make him look better, but there are ten more editors that want to make Rand look as crazy and extreme as possible. So we can add information to make Rand look good, but we can completely change correct information.

If you want to rework the section, you can make some changes and then send them to me to change. Or my other suggestion would be to state Rand's position on civil liberties in regards to Patriot Act and individual rights and make a separate section on the way bottom titled "Civil Rights Controversy". That way, people will see a less 'extreme' position, and then we can hope that most people don't scroll to the bottom.

I don't like having a "controversy" section - whenever I see someone's wikipedia page has a "controversy" section, I immediately think that person did something wrong/is a douche

A controversy section also causes someone to look at that first because controversy is interesting. For us and Rand, it's better that the whole issue stays in the smaller and less obvious civil liberties section

 

[dannno]

THIS is good enough (though I think Civil rights could potentially be changed to Civil Liberties):

Civil rights

Paul criticized the Bowling Green Daily News on May 30, 2002 for supporting the Fair Housing Act. He explained that "a free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination, even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin."[66] On May 19, 2010, Paul stated that he favors 9 out of 10 titles (parts) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but opposed Title II of the Act, which prohibits private businesses who provide public accommodations from discriminating on the basis of race, religion, or national origin against their customers, arguing that it infringes upon Constitutionally-enshrined freedoms.[67] These comments stirred controversy,[68][69][70] and brought renewed concern amongst Republican party insiders about his viability in the general election.[69][70] The following day, Paul stated "unequivocally ... that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964."[71] Paul has also criticized the Americans with Disabilities Act, characterizing it as an overreach of the federal government.[72] He supports a repeal of the USA Patriot Act.[73]

 

[DeadheadForPaul]

We need to clarify this section of Conman lying about Rand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Conway_(politician)#2010_Senate_election

It makes no mention of Chris Matthews issuing a clarification/retraction. Chris Matthews pretty much said Conman lied about Rand wanting to repeal CRA