Talk:Marcia Fudge/Archive 1

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.

Archive 1

Predictions and sources

The edits regarding Fudge's position as a front-runner or heavily favored to win a district are not appropriate beyond what is verifiable and quotable. It doesn't matter if the district is heavily Democratic, that she will "probably" win or "may" be sworn in earlier than others...this article is about Marcia Fudge, not political predictions. Just because CQ Politics says she may be sworn in earlier than others doesn't mean it belongs in this article.

The facts (at least some of them) are that the district is heavily Democratic, that she is likely to win (which is now quoted and sourced), and that she is running in two elections. The edits I've removed contain unnecessary hyperbole and WP:PEACOCK wording, such as: The district is so heavily Democratic that Fudge is overwhelmingly favored in November. "So heavily favored" and "overwhelmingly" are not encyclopedic words; this is an encyclopedia, not Wikinews and not a soapbox. Also, use of the word "may" is a WP:WEASEL word: If she wins as expected, she may be sworn in sooner than any other Democratic freshmen, giving her a leg up in seniority.

Also, regarding her church, we do not have a citation that states which branch of Church of God her church is affiliated with, so it is incorrect to wikilink to the (Anderson) version in the absence of such a citation. The cite we do have simply states Church of God.

I welcome other points of view to improve the wording of the article on these (or other) issues. In fact, I will be contacting the Wikiproject Ohio folks to see if others can weigh in on this article. Frank | talk 17:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Please understand that although I created this article, my concerns are not in any way related to WP:OWN. I just think that this article - like all articles in the project - should conform to standards and policies, and the edits I've removed are because they don't conform, not because I didn't write them.

Now a member

I just uncommented the Congressperson infobox, as I saw Rep. Fudge sworn in on C-SPAN. The election is not final yet, but since she was not running against anybody (and there was no write-in) for the special election to fill out the rest of the current term, thus ensuring her a victory in the special election, the House allowed her to swear in anyway. So the election is unofficial so far, but she's a member regardless.129.22.52.19 (talk) 18:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

You are correct, and I've added two citations to support it. Please be aware, however, that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. Yes, she was sworn in (and I watched it on C-SPAN too) but we should not have something important like that in an article without citations, however silly that may seem. Frank | talk 23:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Marcia Fudge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:25, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Marcia Fudge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081126191854/http://fudge.house.gov/about/index.shtml to http://fudge.house.gov/about/index.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Marcia Fudge. 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) 14:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Chair

She was also permanent chair of the 2016 Democratic National Convention; this should be added to her page. 98.10.165.90 (talk) 00:44, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Views?

This article says nothing about her political positions and views. As a result, the article rates an F.

PLEASE FIX THIS.

This problem is all too common in Wikipedia articles about public figures. ---Dagme (talk) 01:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

This is a volunteer project. You can add information if you like. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Campaign to be Ag Secretary under Biden Administration

This was removed from the article in a recent round of edits, and I have not found documentation as to why, so I have added it back with edits. It is relevant to her eventual nomination to the cabinet, and should be carried over as a future section regarding her is developed. Pauseforfermata (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Pauseforfermata, Thanks for adding that back—I didn't see that it had disappeared. Reported in multiple RS, so definitely fair game to include. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 23:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

How should we word the lead sentence?

Hey, User:AleatoryPonderings and User:KidAd, please quit reverting each other about the expression “serving as”. You are both established editors, you know the drill: if you make an edit and someone reverts it, you should go to the article talk page and work it out. When there is controversy, the longstanding usage is the default until there is consensus to change it. So let’s discuss it.

Looking at past usage in that article I see it has said she:

“is the U.S. Representative” (2008),
“is the U.S. Representative serving since 2008” (2018),
“is an American politician serving as the U.S. Representative from Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008” (2019 until December 2020).
“is an American politician who has served as the U.S. Representative for Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008” (change made yesterday by Aleatory)
“is an American politician who has been the U.S. Representative for Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008” (change made today by Aleatory)

Let’s have a discussion here and reach a consensus which of these various formats to use for the lead sentence. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

As I stated on KidAd's talk just now:

I cited the talk page discussion (Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#"Serving_as"_in_lede_of_politics_articles) because two experienced editors agreed with me that "serving as" is not appropriate, for both style reasons and POV reasons. That looks like consensus to me. The grammatical problem with "serving as" is that there's no verb in the sentence if you just use "serving" as a gerund. You need to use serve as a verb (is serving, has served) for there to be a complete sentence. I'm not sure why US politics articles use this phrase so much …

So, I'm fine with anything that doesn't say "serving as", because it's not grammatical. I think "since 2008" is helpful context, so the last two versions (unsurprisingly, since those were my edits) would be my preference. I have no particular content-based objections to any of these versions; my objection is only that the phrase "serving as" isn't grammatically correct as it's used at present. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 17:35, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not support using more words to say what could easily be said using "served as." Any notion that these two words used in tandem is "ungrammatical" is the kind of grammar "hot take" that I have no time for. There is no official policy in the WP:MOS that prohibits the use of "served as," and a short discussion on a talk page from over a month ago is not strong justification for using clunky wording in the first sentence of an article. KidAd talk 17:58, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

In my view, it's "clunky" to use words in an ungrammatical fashion. And it's not a hot take, because I provided both an argument and talk page discussion to back it up. There are many aspects of English grammar that the MOS does not specifically promote or prevent, because this is an English language website that uses English grammar. It seems we are at an impasse here, so hopefully some other editors will chime in. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

It looks to me as if you would both agree with "has served as ... since...". "Has served as" is grammatical so that eliminates the gerund problem, and you have both mentioned it as acceptable. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I would definitely support Marcia Louise Fudge (born October 29, 1952) is an American politician who has served as the U.S. Representative for Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008, or Popcornfud's alternative below. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

^ I support this as well. KidAd talk 18:32, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

This version, “an American politician who has been the U.S. Representative for Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008, looks great to me. Popcornfud (talk) 18:42, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

So I guess we just have to decide whether we want has been or has served? I favour has been per Popcornfud.

I also recognize that the change here would likely have implications for many other US politics articles, and to the extent this article would be inconsistent with those (e.g., Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, etc, etc, etc) perhaps an RfC would be in order. I find it rather mystifying why "serving as" has become the standard. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

AleatoryPonderings, my own feeling is that it's just a cliche. Cliches spread. That's it, really. Popcornfud (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

My two cents: I don't see "serving as" as ungrammatical at all, but why write it when we can just use simple verb forms such as "is" or "has been" etc? I would use the structure "X is the U.S. representative", or if we want to include the time at which X became the representative, "X has been the U.S. representative since <whenever>". (Note that "X is <whatever> since <whenever>" is ungrammatical. It's continuous so needs "has been".) Popcornfud (talk) 18:25, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

If it helps, reliable sources primarily use "served as" and close variants. For example, Fox News says Fudge has served as the representative for Ohio’s 11th Congressional District since 2008..RollCall says [Fudge] has served in the House for more than a decade. WKYC says The 68-year-old has served as representative of Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008. Bloomberg News says Fudge, who has served in the House since 2008. USA Today says Fudge has served in the House since 2008. The wording is neutral, supported by reliable sources, and completely grammatical. KidAd talk 18:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely, no disagreement with any of that. It's just that strictly speaking it doesn't add any information or clarity, and can be removed when it comes to us writing our encyclopaedia articles. It's not like sources don't also say "He was the president" instead of "He served as president" etc, so why pick the longer version? Popcornfud (talk) 18:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

It looks to me as if we have consensus for “an American politician who has been the U.S. Representative for Ohio's 11th congressional district since 2008. Somebody can go ahead and implement that. Thank you all for your input; it's amazing what discussion can accomplish. As the Staples ads say, "That was easy." 0;-D -- MelanieN (talk) 18:52, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I found the "[un]grammatical" arguments above really strange. This question has nothing to do with grammar; rather, it's a matter of "serving as" being a WP:POV and MOS:PEACOCK problem. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 07:57, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tieram. Peer reviewers: Kaatiegabrielle.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Atlantic City housing Authority in NJ

I need assistance with HUD my civil rights has been violated under HUD Nicole! Can 107.116.83.41 (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

1st afri-am woman since the prior one

The article says she "...became the first African-American woman to serve as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development since Patricia Roberts Harris left the office...". This awkward saying she was the first since the prior one, but the larger point would be the constant virtue signals on the basis of race.

Done Agreed that the wording was awkward. Novemberjazz 19:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Low-Income Housing

Madam Secretary; My wife & I are independent seniors, over the age of 65, paying rents here in Chicago, IL to our landlord that has been going up on rents for the past 4 years, plus this one. Two months ago, I read an article on FHA Section 245(a) Program created by FHA back in Great Depression for assisting low-income US Citizens to become First Time Homeowners. I started making contact with mortgage lenders, but none offered this program, so I called your FHA Recourse Center, learning from your rep., explaining i would have to make contact with 1 of 160 FHA approved lenders, but none of them offered the program, because their FICO scores start at 580+, the Section 245a, FICO scores start @ 500+ with graduated payments, up to 10% down. The rep. also stated that FHA will still back and insure the FHA Section 245a program loan, if i'm able to locate an FHA approved lender and to let the lender know, but still none will offer. This FHA program needs to be Re-activated and out of Hibernation, so low-income US Citizens and Seniors can again become First Time Homeowners. I feel, with other low-income renters that "Reactivating" the FHA Section 245a Program can help put our Nations, foreclosed/distressed, abundant single family properties back on the federal, state, county and city tax rolls, from US low-income citizens and independent seniors being able to obtain a mortgage through our FHA Section 245(a) program. That's greatly needed in today's times. 2600:1700:2360:1820:B083:4A04:DA42:A359 (talk) 13:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Detroit DHC is failing

https://share.newsbreak.com/4drg13eh 2601:406:4C03:EFB0:69D9:A1C7:374E:19D5 (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)