Talk:Peter Roskam - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Missvain (talk | contribs) at 17:07, 23 June 2022 (OneClickArchiver archived Energy section to Talk:Peter Roskam/Archive 1). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:07, 23 June 2022 by Missvain (talk | contribs) (OneClickArchiver archived Energy section to Talk:Peter Roskam/Archive 1)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter Roskam article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article has had a peer review which is now archived.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

U.S. Congress Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) Person(s).

To-do list for Peter Roskam: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2007-05-20

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Cleanup : Inconsistent citation style. Fix dead links in citations. --Dual Freq 16:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Priority 1 (top)

Peter Roskam was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
Review: March 15, 2007.

Archives
Untitled Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Untitled

Why Roskam's income needs to be listed?

I question the value of publishing, on Misplaced Pages, Roksam's Income, prior to his election to Congress. This is not done for any other biography of political office holders, then why should Roskam be treated any different by Wikipeida? Just because the some editorializing Tribune blogger wanted to take a cheap shot, it does not mean Wikipeida has to put up every little crufted, gossipy detail written by some blogger. See WP:BLPSTYLE. Breakgrant (talk) 18:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I, too question the relevancy and appropriateness of this information to the article. Just because it is source (by a blog), doesn't mean it belongs here. --rogerd (talk) 15:13, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The source is the Chicago Tribune, clearly a reliable source. The incomes / net worth of political candidates are frequently discussed and notable because they impact their ability to contribute to their own campaigns, aka self funding. Many politicians share copies of their tax returns, frequently attracting considerable media coverage. Also, Roskam is a Public figure and therefore is not entitled to the same expectation of privacy. There is nothing injurious about disclosing Roskam's income; it would be different if information such as a social security number were included in the article. Propol (talk) 17:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it was published in the blog of a Tribune columnist, not the printed newspaper. --Dual Freq (talk) 23:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe that is an incorrect statement; the article was published in the print edition of the Chicago Tribune, in addition to appearing in the Tribune's blog (which is still subject to editorial review anyway). Furthermore, I haven't heard anyone dispute the accuracy of the information presented. Propol (talk) 03:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is this so important that wikipeida must publish this mans income for 2005??? Just because a crusading blogger, who works for the Tribune, needs to publish minutia, does not mean it's Encyclopedic in content WP:BLP WP:GRAPEVINE. Why is this information not found on other Northern Illinois office holders?. Why only Roskam's? What value is this information, other than salacious gossip. Any finally why, so vigorously oppose this? Garywheaton (talk) 17:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow --- $615,000 is minutia? You must be loaded! — goethean ॐ 17:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

There are two points of relevancy. First, $615K is a lot of income for a lawyer - it puts him in league with large law firm partners and very successful independent lawyers. The exact amount is not important, but the fact that he is extremely successful is. It's like noting that someone plays for a pro basketball team instead of just pick-up basketball. If there's a better way to say that, it would be fine, but simply naming the firm and saying he is a partner does not convey that. Second, as noted it affects his personal ability to contribute to his campaign and overall wealth (which is relevant to a politician). Again, however, the exact amount is not that relevant. Moreover, his income for a single year does not indicate whether he is wealthy or not. $600K in a year is very small compared to the overall cost of financing a major campaign these days so, without more, the term is meaningless. Overall, I think the mention is spurious and relies on innuendo or synthesis to get to the point of relevancy to the article. However, the subject matter might be worth mentioning if there is a better reliable source that ties this more directly to his notability as a lawyer and politician. Wikidemo (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to follow up, Republicans have made an issue of opposing "trial lawyers", and Roskam obviously is one. That could affect his position on so-called tort reform. Again, though, that's innuendo unless we have reliable sources that describe the relevance. Wikidemo (talk) 20:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

There used to be a Chicago Tribune article connecting the riches that Roskam made off of personal injury claims to his tort reform promises. It must have been removed by our various Republican friends and their sockpuppets. About a year ago, partisans aggressively cleansed the article of anything that they deemed negative. — goethean ॐ 20:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Material like that can go into the child article: Illinois 6th congressional district election, 2006. As a matter of fact, that's exactly where it went. Kossack4Truth (talk) 03:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's fair to mention that he is a proponent of tort reform despite earning a living as a personal injury plaintiff (but we would have to cite it and it would have to be notable either as a life event or a major criticism of his policy, not just WP:SYNTH, a POV attack, WP:SOAPboxing, or trivia) Wikidemo (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits

I have removed several non-notable criticisms of Roskam per WP:COATRACK. Please review. Kossack4Truth (talk) 01:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Just a suggestion, Cactusframe: try discussing it here per WP:BRD before putting that "poker rights blogger" back into a biography about a living person. If we include every criticism about a politician from every blogger and every opponent's campaign manager, Misplaced Pages would occupy half the Internet and the bloggers and campaign managers would occupy the other half. It isn't notable. No matter what a politician does, there will be some blogger somewhere who is displeased.

As a hypothetical example, if the Duckworth campaign manager had cited a study by the Illinois Bar Association showing that 42.7% of Roskam's cases had been dismissed by the courts as frivolous, and if we had a JPG of his Yellow Pages ad saying, "We don't care whether you can actually prove your case or not," you'd have something. Kossack4Truth (talk) 03:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Dual Freq, now that I've seen your recent edit, it appears that the original source (minus the bit that was added by the "poker rights blogger") is Crain's Chicago Business. That might be worth looking into. It sounds like it may satisfy WP:RS. Kossack4Truth (talk) 11:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Education Again

Dual Freq, thanks for reverting the re-addition of the education section. --BenBurch (talk) 14:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

More on recent edits

Scjessey has removed a quality portrait photograph I found on Commons, restoring the old version -- what appears to be a Polaroid snapshot. He has also removed well-sourced and highly notable facts from the lead paragraph. The sources were readily available and cited in the body of the article if he had bothered to look. I have reverted him and added the cites to the lead paragraph, in a good-faith effort to make the article better. I stand ready to discuss this edit. Removal of well-sourced material is vandalism. Kossack4Truth (talk) 11:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Who Roskam defeated is not biographically important, so it should not form part of the article introduction. These campaign-related facts are properly covered in the body of the article. I have removed them for reasons of undue weight. I removed the portrait in an earlier edit by accident, and I am perfectly happy with the one K4T has found. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

New edit war?

The most recent changes to the page have been of a partisan nature, followed with challenges to "prove" the editor wrong. The reason for removing one portion seems to be the fact that a link to a story has expired; this does not turn the story into "hearsay", it just means that people will now have to go to the library to view the article. Before the link died, it was viewed by other editors, and was legitimate. Proof does not need to be found online. I've cited obituaries in articles that only exist on microfilm or hard copy.

References are made to reporter Eric Kroll's "fanciful speculations"; for that claim, you need to find a reference disproving his printed assertions and proving them to be nothing more than speculation. "Hearsay" for purposes of Wiki articles is when an editor claims he read or heard something "somewhere" but can't produce a legitimate source. It does NOT include a report from a reliable source (newspapers are generally considered such) with which one editor disagrees, especially for partisan reasons.

The phrases "did not find fault" and "cleared" are very different things. The FEC does not generally "clear" people or groups of charges, they just find insufficient reason to pursue further action. Unless you can find a reference that specifically states that Roskam was "cleared of charges", we go with what is known.

References to Roskam's control (or lack thereof) of a PAC (BTW, "PAC" is an acronym and is normally written in all caps) are irrelevant. His campaign was found not at fault, but CWF, led by Gary Bauer, was found to have violated election law. Those are the facts. Adding the parenthetical phrase "which Roskam's campaign had no control" is both unnecessary and ungrammatical.

Using the word "decisively" is redundant. As has been stated, a 16% victory is pretty decisive, which is exactly the issue. It's like calling someone a tall seven-footer.

Summarizing: If the statement made in a newspaper report is false, that must be proven before removing it. Removing it because the link to a two-year-old news story in a small suburban paper has finally expired is not grounds for calling it hearsay. The other edits are just restating things in a euphemistic manner, and WP style seeks to avoid such things.

Before we get into an edit war, let's hear other opinions. --Couillaud (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I added a link to the current (pay) archive of the article that was questioned. It exists. --BenBurch (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

And the user who made the original challenge was identified as a sockpuppet of Joehazelton (talk · contribs) and the article semi-protected. Thanks for the link, as it defeats one of his "arguments" outright. -- Couillaud (talk) 22:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Needs Updating on Committee Assignments

Peter Roskam is now a member of the House Committee on Ways and Means:

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/members.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fcanzo (talk • contribs) 05:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Misplaced Pages. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/chicago/
Triggered by \bairport-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II _Online 11:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Peter Roskam. 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/20070929101442/http://www.ilenviro.org/publications/files/2005scorecard.pdf to http://www.ilenviro.org/publications/files/2005scorecard.pdf

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

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

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.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:26, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Did not work. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:59, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Peter Roskam. 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.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

All successful! --1990'sguy (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 21 external links on Peter Roskam. 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) 19:58, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peter Roskam. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070508224946/http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/FuelCellToday/IndustryInformation/IndustryInformationExternal/NewsDisplayArticle/0%2C1602%2C9003%2C00.html to http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/FuelCellToday/IndustryInformation/IndustryInformationExternal/NewsDisplayArticle/0%2C1602%2C9003%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 19:45, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Peter Roskam

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Peter Roskam's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "primaryresults":

From 2018 United States House of Representatives elections in Illinois: "Illinois Primary Election Results". The New York Times. Retrieved March 22, 2018.
From Adam Kinzinger: "2016 Illinois primary results, March 15, 2016". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved May 13, 2016.
From 2016 United States House of Representatives elections in Illinois: "Election Results – General Primary – 3/15/2016". Illinois State Board of Elections. Retrieved December 12, 2016.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Categories: