Jump to content

Talk:John Eder

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

Picture

[edit]

If anyone has a picture of him, go ahead and add it. --Contrib 17:37, 4 May 2005 (UTC) There's a good picture here but is it fair use? [1][reply]

NPOV and PR language

[edit]

I've knocked out some language that has a definite POV and some that was taken wholesale from Eder & Green Party PR and newspaper articles; some of it was in copyrighted material. None of it was sourced. Quotes by Dean Myerson on how cool it all was or on his swearing-in ceremony didn't seem necessary or appropriate to a short biographical article about a politician, and phrases like "great organizations" are definitely inappropriate, being value judgements. This language should NOT be reintroduced to the article. If anyone knows some basic biographical information, like date and place of birth, age, occupation (I think Eder's a house painter?), etc., that would be useful and appropriate. The article still needs work, and really, campaign info doesn't seem all that pertinent to Eder's overall life and influence in politics. Deirdre 28 June 2005 21:46 (UTC)

There's more. I marked a NPOV dispute sign over one section in particular. 69.207.229.129 03:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of February 2008, this article is still havily baised. I would almost dare to add a notability tag to this article. User:AsukaSeagull —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.73.160 (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the tag because of misuse. Dispute guidelines necessitate that one be more helpful/specific about resolving an issue and allowing the possibility of finally removing the neutrality dispute tag through consensus.

The article has undergone more sourcing since the tag was placed in March. Please see if the changes satisfy concerns and if not please explain why you feel it still needs attention.

To simply place the tag on the article indefinitely without giving specific/useful suggestions as to how to improve the article, is a spurious use of the tag that places a cloud over other peoples good work.

Please contribute to good community by being unambiguous and detailing line for line from the article the "heavily biased" sections you perceive to still exist and make constructive suggestions that contribute to a resolution.

Please do check yourself to see if your intent is to put in the necessary work to contribute to a good article. If you find you cannot soundly argue for reapplying the tag, offering a reasonable chance to address your concerns, then please consider that you may not be in a position to use the tag correctly at this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.179.155 (talk) 04:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bio

[edit]

Thanks to whoever it was who wrote the bio; we still need a photo, though. Perhaps the Maine Greens can let us use one for public domain. I'll look into it. Deirdre 21:11, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

found one--now I just have to figure out how to post it properly.... Deirdre 19:36, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Governor's race speculation

[edit]

While the Phoenix does mention John Eder as a possible candidate it also says the party is desperate for a candidate which is not true. Lynne Williams, Chair of the Maine Green Independent Party, has already announced that she intends to run for Governor of Maine in 2010 [2]. With Williams running it is highly unlikely Eder will run for Governor considering his stature in the party he surely was consulted. Also there have only been two contested primaries in the history of the party for any office let alone governor. Any Green running in Maine for Governor also needs Clean Election financing (to be competitive) and with two candidates in the race it would make it difficult to collect the 3,250 $5 contributions required to receive clean election funds. Lastly when you read what it says in the articles three lines about John Eder it is apparent that the author has little knowledge of the party and is mentioning Eder because he is arguablly the highest profile green in the state. In the three lines about Eder and the Greens there are two incorrect statements. Here is what it says

Link to article [* http://thephoenix.com/Portland/News/72879-We-sing-we-dance-we-steal-things/] "JOHN EDER of Portland is the only Green Independent ever elected to the Legislature.

MAJOR DRAWBACK He's also the only Green to fail to win re-election. Still, the party is desperate for a candidate."

1) the greens are desperate for a candidate (already have one and election is still almost a year away)

2) Eder's "also the only Green to fail to win re-election" (not true. While eder is the only green ever elected to the state house, and is the only green state rep. (incumbent) to not win re-election he is far from the only Green office holder in Maine to not be re-elected. This is easily confirmed by going to the national Green Parties wegbsite gp.org and checking election results for Maine in the parties election database (link to database on the elections page).

For these reasons and the speculative nature of the article I am removing info about possible run for Governor Highground79 (talk) 23:50, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I've removed the Eder speculation totally and added a link to Lynne Williams, an article I've started.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 00:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


You would pretend to know more about Maine politics than a syndicated columnist who has written for decades about Maine politics and the Greens in particular perhaps more than any other? No wonder Wikipedia has a bad name. You infer much more from the absence of information and ignore the fact that the author plainly speculates on an Eder run. Then it must be listing points numerically that makes one an authority on Wikipedia.


Alright then:

1) In addition to flouting the wisdom of a well respected Maine columnist, your willingness to put the question of an Eder run to rest is both arrogant and hasty. There is more than a year before the deadline to declare candidacy with the Maine Secretary of State.

2) Many people announce their candidacy. Circumstances change. Williams could be hit by a bus or otherwise withdraw. You'll forgive me if I put aside the possibility of your clairvoyance.

3) Eder has not weighed in on a Lynn Williams candidacy. It is as likely that she would consult him on her run as it is that she would have liked to have his public endorsement upon her announcement.

4) The fact that the Greens have not run a Gubernatorial primary has no real bearing on the future [they came close in 2002]. They'd also never won a seat in the legislature before Eder, and many said they would never, but that changed quickly[BTW: Eder was re-elected once]. Same with the Portland City Council where they now number three. You show your bias here because you would not likely assert that the one Republican to put their name forward two years before the election, is the only candidate that would ever surface.

5) As to the question of whether Eder was consulted, Williams is under no obligation there. Does former Maine House Speaker John Richardson have to consult A.G. Stephen Rowe before putting out a press release announcing his gubernatorial run as the Democratic nominee? You presume to know far too much about Maine Green inter-party communications. You'll have to establish your authority there.

6) Williams does not have the state party’s endorsement which would not come until the annual convention in 2010. It is a separate process from the primary which will be decided by a plurality of registered Maine Greens in June of 2010. You have no idea how this will shake out in the end.


You are picking apart the wrong article. It does not stand up to the sort of rigor and metrics you run on it. The author’s aim is to give an opinion and to be pithy, not to deal with esoteric facts. Eder was elected and not reelected for a third term. The Author deals with this in two lines in keeping with the articles listing of each candidates pros and cons: "JOHN EDER of Portland is the only Green Independent ever elected to the Legislature.MAJOR DRAWBACK He's also the only Green to fail to win re-election. Still, the party is desperate for a candidate." You are clearly not familiar with the author's style of writing. It requires a sense of humor.

The substantive issue is the question of an Eder run which the author, clearly speculated on.

BTW: The author is not only a purveyor of speculation and opinion but a longstanding observer of the greens--since the Maine party's inception in fact. He has interviewed Eder in past columns on the question of his running for governor. He has established in past columns that he is even on the Maine Green list-serve.

Yet, you claim you know better and suggest that the author is only mentioning Eder because it is one of the only green names he knows? Again, you'll have to establish your qualifications that give you the audacity to say how you know more than this author.


Despite your best arguments it is indisputable that a very limited number of eventualities can end any speculation about Eder’s possible run. I can think of these three:

1) Eder does not declare his candidacy with the secretary of state by the deadline in January 2010.

2) Eder himself announces publicly that he has no such intentions which he has not done yet.

3) Eder dies before these other two things happen.


There is plenty of time to clear this up.

Also, Eder finished second in a five way race. Only declared candidates are viable and there were only five registered with the Secretary of State despite that they do count all write-ins. Can't always rely on the Greens to get it right because they are self-serving. You need to go to the source.

http://maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/2008/tabs-can-county-charter-com-11-08.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by I who? (talk • contribs) 05:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

66.186.179.155 (talk) 12:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.253.102 (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on John Eder. 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: 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on John Eder. 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) 15:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Eder. 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) 13:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Eder. 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) 21:14, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

[edit]

User:Johnmichaeleder is a major contributor to this article and appears to be its subject, though he hasn't declared his conflict of interest. I've added tags to reflect this problem on the page and would appreciate if other users would help clean up this mess.--TM 15:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Eder&oldid=1207081173"