Jump to content

Talk:Mark Hatfield

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMark Hatfield has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 26, 2008Good article nomineeListed

"Hatfield's victory in a Democratic year "

[edit]

The phrase "in a Democratic year" was deleted by a IP user and restored by User:aboutmovies. I agree with the IP user, in that while the Democrats kept control of both the House and the Senate, that they lost a significant number of seats. According to United States House of Representatives elections, 1966, the Democrats lost 47 seats (ignoring the situation with Adam Powell) taking their majority from 155 seats (295-140) to 60 seats (247-187), and in the Senate (United States Senate elections, 1966), the democrats lost 3 seats, going from a 67-33 majority to a 64-36 majority. In addition, the only house seats that the Democrats gained were in Maine, Alabama and Mississippi, while losing seats in 32 states. Given the Republican gains in that year, while remaining clearly in the Minority, I believe that refering to the election as a Democratic year is incorrect.Naraht (talk) 15:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, we are all wrong. That part already existed prior to my work bringing it up to GA, and the information was simply re-integrated incorrectly and the Democratic year refers to 1962 (and it may refer to the elections in Oregon alone or possibly the 1958 election). I'll try and do some research on where that statement comes from so it can be sourced. Aboutmovies (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
CoolNaraht (talk) 01:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hatfield's collaboration with The Fellowship (Christian organization)

[edit]

Should there be a mention of Hatfield's role with "The Fellowship"? Hatfield's role with "The Fellowship" get's mentioned in the Wikipedia article on that group and prominently mentioned in Jeff Sharlet's book. --Calan (talk) 16:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overlapping Terms

[edit]

According to the InfoBox used in this article, Hatfield's first term as U.S. Senator commenced on January 3, 1967, but his term as Governor of Oregon did not end until the following January 9. Since he would not have been legally able to serve in both offices at the same time, this raises some questions as follows:

(1) Did he resign as Governor six days early on January 3, 1967 in order to take office as U.S. Senator?

(2) If the answer to question 1 is "yes", who became Acting Governor as a result?

(3) Did he defer taking office as a U.S. Senator pending the completion of his term as Governor on January 9, 1967?

Any assistance from my fellow Wikipedians in resolving the questions I have raised would be most appreciated. --TommyBoy (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that either it was vacant for six days or the Oregon legislature appointed his replacement to fill the position right away. For now, I changed it so that it makes more ense, but we should find a definitice answer for this. SOXROX (talk) 19:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was number 3 according to the Congressional Bio. But the issue is now that Cong Bio still says his Senate term started Jan. 3. Seems like it should stay Jan. 3, but have a footnote. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:07, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked his biography at the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress which clearly states that he delayed taking office as U.S. Senator until January 10, 1967 pending completion of his term as Governor [1]. Based upon this information, I think we should update the InfoBox, but with a footnote explaining that he delayed taking office for a week in order to avoid any further confusion. --TommyBoy (talk) 02:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done The matter's resolved in that case! SOXROX (talk) 03:04, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hatfield's delay in taking office was quite newsworthy at the time. Because he delayed taking office, Hatfield had the least seniority of any member of the freshman class, which was much more significant then than it is today. There remains one additional question to be answered: was Oregon's 2nd Senate seat vacant for these six days or was there some pro-tempore senator? YBG (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha Phi Omega 3rd National VP location.

[edit]

Mark Hatfield served as third National Vice President of Alpha Phi Omega from December of 1964 to December of 1966. It really doesn't seem to fit into "Early Years", "Political Career" or "Later Years and Legacy". Any ideas? Note, reference is the Fraternity magazine "Torch and Trefoil V40N1, February 1965" for the beginning and "Torch and Trefoil V42N1, February-March 1967" for the fact that he wasn't re-elected.Naraht (talk) 19:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Outed?

[edit]

This is in the outing article in the history section: "The first outing by an activist in America occurred in February 1989. Michael Petrelis, along with a few others, decided to out Mark Hatfield, a Republican Senator from Oregon, because he supported legislation initiated by Jesse Helms. At a fundraiser in a small town outside of Portland, the group stood up and outed him in front of the crowd. Petrelis later tried to make news by standing on the U.S. Capitol steps and reading the names of "twelve men and women in politics and music who ... are secretly gay." Though the press showed up, no major news organization published the story. (Gross, p. 85) Potential libel suits deterred publishers." I have only been able to find blogs that mention this and it's not here so either it should be added here or removed there. Acoma Magic (talk) 10:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, someone mentioned this years ago, and it is in the archives. Unless you find a RS, it should not be here nor there. Whether or not he was or was not, just because someone says you are does not make it so, which is about all I've read on the topic. It would be different if his wife came forward, or his kids, or a source with intimate knowledge on the topic. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Hatfield. 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: 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) 09:12, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mark Hatfield. 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: 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) 08:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OE source

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mark_Hatfield&oldid=1253777908"