Talk:John Peyton (American politician)

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


Untitled[edit]

On the Mayor John Peyton's wikipedia entry it states that his family's Ponte Vedra Inn & Club did not allow anoy black man to reside there. I have searched online and haven't found any online documents that prove or disprove this fact which leads me to believe it is a false statement since I am sure that the news would have stated it if it was a known fact during his election.

I think I remember they did report on it, but it wasn't a big deal because it had nothing to do with the Peytons. I can't find anything about it either, though, so I'm taking it out for now:
One of the holdings in that real estate portfolio elicited some controversy during the 2003 race, when it was discovered that the deed to the Ponte Vedra Inn & Club forbade any Negro from ever holding title to the property (the deed was written before desegregation, and any such clauses are legally void today).

--Cúchullain t / c 17:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone more computer literate, and with more time than I can research and add information related to the referendum on Cecil Field NAS, and the Baymeadows Golf Club. Both of these issues are very relevant to John Peyton, especially since he flip-flpped on them both. When the golf club was sold, the mayor pleged to never allow a host of apartments to be built in its place, primarily due to the already out-of-control traffic in the area, but he later had a "change of heart", that many believe is the result of being in the pocket of the contractor building the apartments.

There was also a referendum on the ballot this year to return the Navy's master jet base to Cecil Field, which the mayor very much supported until earlier this year. I personally sent an e-mail to John Peyton showing my support, and he responded by saying that he would fight tooth and nail against anyone opposing the return of the base. Later, he changed his mind and opposed returning Cecil Field.

I do not want to edit this article because as you can proably guess, I really do not like the mayor, and probably won't be very POV. But perhaps one of you might find this information worth inclusion.

I think his flip on the issue would be worth mentioning, if someone can write it factually. It was what really brought the issue up to begin with, and what ultimately killed it. JaxDaily 05:05, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whitewashing[edit]

I recently asked for some help at WP:ANB and therefore had it on my watchlist, which is why I saw a recent post there about this article. I'm not otherwise involved, but I decided to comment anyway because this kind of thing annoys me.

An anon editor, 161.243.51.205 (talk · contribs), has made a series of edits that might be construed as an attempt to whitewash this person's record. [1] The IP address is assigned to the government of Jacksonville, Fla.,[2] so it's a fairly transparent attempt to slant the article to be more favorable. My instinct is to revert. However, considering this is about a living person the article should be properly sourced in order to conform to WP:BLP. However, it also needs to conform to WP:NPOV, so this information ought to be present if true. The solution is for Wikipedians who watch this article to properly source anything they want to add. After that, further whitewashings by the government of Jacksonville can be reverted without any concerns. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't revert for the same reason; I didn't want to re-introduce any of the unsourced negative material (there was nothing untrue that I could see, but a source is required.) I'll try to take care of this soon.--Cúchullain t/c 22:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and reverted most of it back to the previous version, but took out the unsourced material about his tenure with the Transportation Authority. The controversy was fairly substantial and deserves to be covered, but it needs to be sourced per WP:BIO.--Cúchullain t/c 22:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And now, a year later, the article has gone the opposite way, with a bunch of unsourced negative material being added. I've removed it; I'm surprised it was allowed to stand for so long. We clearly need to keep a closer watch on this article.--Cúchullain t/c 20:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Peyton (U.S. politician). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 17:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Peyton_(American_politician)&oldid=1209736239"