Jump to content

Talk:Charlie Melançon

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

Biased?

[edit]

Some edits to his issue record do seem to be politically motivated. For example, while 2008 presidential endorsements are often mentioned on these pages, they should never be phrased in the partisan way it is here (endorsed Obama "over John McCain" and gives McCain's margin in LA, and then adds, just for good measure, "Obama was the most liberal senator in 2007"). Obviously trying to tag Melancon as a "liberal" ahead of the Senate campaign for backing Obama, but endorsements of party nominees such as these are routine. Remove it, unless we're gonna adapt all the equivalent info of every blue-state Republican ("Mike Castle, R-DE, endorsed John McCain, even though his state went for Obama and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden. McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time" etc...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.182.233 (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right. I just did a major, major, major cleanup on this. Wow. If editing like this continues, I'll request protection. The bulk of the cleanup I did seemed to be "Charlie Melancon's Wikipedia article as told by Republicans." Think he's a bad politician? That's fine! The facts can speak for themselves. A small group of individuals (perhaps one) made a ton of interjections along the way from a Republican viewpoint, including not just irrelevant information, but information whose citation did not match what was written in the article - meaning it was either outright lying or inferring information to make him look bad, or wrong articles were cited.

-Removed French pronunciation of his name which was there for no conceivable reason other than "Louisiana people require French pronunciations" - either that or it was deliberately placed there to evoke anti-French sentiment some have. Is he French? Then cite that and make more mention of it.

-Removed the portion about him working for Edwin Washington Edwards, the governor for whom he used to work that is now serving time for racketeering charges. How is this relevant to Charlie Melancon? Does every politician who used to work for somebody serving time have that noted in their article? If that was the case, or if Melancon appeared to be in a similar predicament, then it'd be notable. As is, it's just pointless "look at this association! Look at it!!" As if that isn't enough, the citation for it goes to an article about Edwin Washington Edwards and doesn't mention a word about Melancon. It doesn't mention a word about anybody who used to work for him. It just talks about his prison sentence winding down and nothing else. It's not even verifiable even if it WAS notable.

-Removed uncited information about which years he headed a lobbyist group. The American Sugar Cane League is a lobbyist group, and he did indeed head it! Unfortunately, the article cited did not give any timeframe whatsoever for when he was the head of it other than "Before serving in Congress" - the person who added in the years asserted that up until the year he did start serving, he was the head. That might be true, and if so, a source for it should not be difficult to find.

-The entire section on how he won his first term in the House used to read like a laundry list of excuses written by the RNC. "Because of the attacks on Tauzin, the makeup of the district, and Romero's refusal to endorse Tauzin, Melancon won a victory by 569 votes." I wasn't aware that this was the official cause and effect, and that preceding information is not able to speak for itself or infer that! Furthermore, the preceding information has not a single citation and seems to tell an opinion on what happened and why because of it. If all this happened, citations should not be difficult to find. It's not that I doubt this happened, it's that none of it is cited!

-Removed "Republican Romero was unable to make effective issues against Melancon, and he was undoubtedly weakened as well in a heavily Democratic year nationally." No relevance and opinion-based.

-Removed "Ironically, Melancon's Third District was the first in Louisiana since Reconstruction to have elected a Republican to Congress, David C. Treen, who served from 1973 to 1980, when he resigned to become his state's first Republican governor in more than a century." That's not cited (or ironic). It belongs in the District's page if anywhere.

-Removed an entire section was titled "Taxpayer Funded Trip." For months it has remained this way. What is "taxpayer funded trip"? It's criticism that was clearly edited out of the article several months ago when it was titled "Criticism" per Wikipedia policy, then edited back in as its own heading with several subsections that are nothing more than other relevant political information! Indefensible, and the rest of the stuff was restored to the rightful place of "under US House of Representatives"

-Removed "In August 2009, Rep. Melancon was criticized for not staging or appearing at health-care town hall meetings.[1]". Not only is a single editorial not notable, not only was the word "staged" used to infer that Melancon would have put on a "fake town hall" even if he did hold one (not only petty and partisan, but Unwikipedic), but the link is dead.

-Removed calling EFCA "Card Check." If it's going to be in there, explain why it's in there, and cite it. Otherwise, it's just "You might also know it by this name!" Additionally, the language used to describe his comments on EFCA vs. his co-sponsorship with respect to the cited article is confusing. I cleaned it up a bit to make it timeline-neutral.

I'm aghast at how the page was left like this for so long.Kelseypedia (talk) 05:14, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.dailyworld.com/article/20090827/OPINION01/90827001

pronunciation

[edit]

What's the pronunciation supposed to be? And in which language? — kwami (talk) 15:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looked right to me; why did you tag it as "dubious"?. Language: English as spoken in South Louisiana. (I have a friend with the last name Melancon; he commented that while in evacuation from New Orleans after Katrina he felt like he was in a foreign country because people in other parts of the USA didn't know how to pronounce his last name; Melancon is fairly common in South Louisiana.) Infrogmation (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The pronunciation looks correct as it is and matches the way he pronounces his own name. Gobonobo T C 18:25, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It contradicts itself and does not agree with what he says. It also isn't English. (There may be nasal vowels in LA English, but I doubt there's such a distinction before an /n/.) I'll try fixing it, though because he slurs his name it's hard to hear what he says. Is this correct?: the stressed syllable is like the word "lawn", and the last syllable like the son of "sonic"? — kwami (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are several hundred Google hits that state that the correct pronunciation is "muh-LAW-saw".
Try Googleing: +law +saw +melancon
Or better still, someone could phone his office (or the Clerk of the House) and ask.
72.82.168.225 (talk) 06:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Charlie Melancon. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:43, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orthography

[edit]

As much as it pleases me to see the cedilla in this French name, is this actually how Melançon writes his name? I have not found any documentation to support this, and there is a large paper trail to support the 'Melancon' spelling. It appears to me that the article title and body should be changed accordingly. –Coreydragon (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charlie_Melançon&oldid=1208286440"