Talk:Rocky Anderson

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.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

United States: Presidential elections / Utah Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).
	Utah portal This article is supported by WikiProject Utah (assessed as Mid-importance).

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

LGBTQ+ studies: Person

	LGBTQ portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
	This article is supported by the LGBTQ+ Person task force.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Peace rally

Thousands? I looked at reports from the local news, and some national ones, and they all said that there were beteeen 800-1000 people. I think the creator of this page went beyond neutrality here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.200.116.11 (talk • contribs) 25 Aug 2005

"I looked at reports from the local news, and some national ones, and they all said that there were beteeen 800-1000 people." I know nothing about the event but I do know about the local and national news media. What I know is that they have an unspoken consensus to misreport and misrepresent. In particular, they notoriously and grossly underestimate attendance at peace rallies. I'd go with the reports of the subsequent contributors way before believing what the mainstream media in the US have to say. ---Dagme (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the citation link given seems to have nothing to do with Anderson or the rally. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:37, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. I was there and there WERE thousands there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SLCgal (talk • contribs) 23:09, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

I was also there, there were certainly thousands of people present, and not just at the specific location at the park, but along the streets and at the Salt Palace Convention Center. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.250.156 (talk) 22:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The media crowd estimates for antiwar rallies are almost always way on the low side, just as police and(in D.C.)National Park Service estimates invariably are. Thus, media numbers can't be taken as a refutation of the crowd size estimate in the story. Ken Burch 20:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Involvement in Legacy Highway and the Olympics

Though I have nothing but antipathy for the man and his policies, we really should add a couple of things to get his page more complete. We're missing the most contreversial part of Rocky's policies - the Legacy Highway/Davis County debate. Additionally, we really should mention his part in the Olympics, which certainly went well. I'm planning on adding some about them and look forward to feedback.--Gillespee 20:03, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV concerning alcohol

"Ironically, he has been viewed as one of the state's most outspoken supporters of alcohol use," is a statement that at best is open to debate and at worst is pure propogation of a rather negative view. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.10.165.176 (talk • contribs) 03:07, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

While I suppose it is open to debate (what isn't really?) I cannot for the life of me think of anyone who is more for alcohol than Rocky. Is it more the tone you dislike? Would changing it to something like: "Ironically, Rocky is one of the most outspoken critics of Utah's liquor laws" make it sound more NPOV?--Gillespee 23:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that "ironically" is a problem. Telling the reader where to find irony in not NPOV. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:44, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I myself find it ironic (and more than a little hypocritic) in the disconnect between alcohol and drugs, but you're right so I changed it.--Gillespee 00:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In two places, I've changed the word alcohol to liquor as it is more accurate. 3.2% or weaker beer (which is still technically alcohol...) is not sold by the state and can be bought in convenience stores, beer bars, grocery stores etc. Limes 16:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D.A.R.E

I've added the D.A.R.E. thingamabob. It may toe the line of relevancy, but I think it's a good episode to illistrate Anderson's governing style--blunt, abraisve, and, IMHO, usually correct. Well: I was in D.A.R.E. in high school, and calling it a "waste of time and money" is being very kind the the program. They spent tens of thousands sending the kids from our high school to Lagoon, a Utah amusment part. We rode roller coasters. They gave us all free tee-shirts. Did it reduce drug use? The first thing many of us did while wearing our new D.A.R.E. tee-shirts was drugs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Inappropriatecontent (talk • contribs) 12:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I think I put things a bit more NPOV in the article itself. ;-) InappropriateContent Talk 2:30 PM, December 12, 2005

Fox and Friends/E.D. Hill incident

Due to the coverage the incident recived, I've covered the recent interview/arguement Anderson was involved in on Fox and Friends. Whilst it's a relatively small event, it does offer further insight regarding Anderson's views on various topics from torture to Fox News and/or the "Mainstream media". The only problem is I have no idea who the guy with E.D. Hill was, so for the moment I've just listed him as an "interviewer". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Edders (talk • contribs) 31 August 2006.

Oops, sorry. Forgot to sign. Is there a way to make wikipedia automatically sign your discussion edits? Edders 12:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Not if you don't sign. It really has no way to guess where to do it (people intersperse remarks, people come in and correct their own previous spelling, etc.) - Jmabel | Talk 07:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed POV statements

Removed this from the end of the article: "...as Anderson does not confuse patriotism or support of soldiers with the decisions of governments to place these individuals in harm's way. It seems his point is that such criticism of government action is valid especially when soldiers are dying in an unnecessary war".

Although the "as Anderson" bit was probably meant to reflect the opinions of those supporters cited, it was worded in a way that presented this opinion as fact. If it can be made NPOV I have no problem with its re-insertion. The last sentence, however; was pure POV. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Edders (talk • contribs) 4 September 2006.

Citation standardization

This article is a mess when it comes to references. Numerous different citation styles are used and we have both a "notes" and a "references" section. Someone should go through and organize the citations and references... But I've decided that I'm too lazy to do it myself. :) Porlob 17:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mormon?

Is there any reason why Rocky is in the Latter Day saint category? Since he is not a mormon, I am confused why he is in this group? Reds0xfan 20:40 24 Sep 2006 (MDT)

It seems that he was raised Mormon, but no longer identifies as such. I agree: that should be removed. Porlob 13:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legal cases

I notice that Bott v. Deland, Bradford v. Moench, and University of Utah Students Against Apartheid v. Peterson were all recently delinked in the article. If anyone thinks that any of these have article potential (I suspect they are all borderline), please feel free to relink. - Jmabel | Talk 20:32, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biased

The beginning of this article reads like a campaign speech, I think there are some serious POV issues with it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.247.11.54 (talk • contribs) 9 March 2007.

Definite POV

Just removed the loaded term "marriage equality" and replaced it with "gay marriage". Previous posters are correct. This article reads like a campaign statement. — J M Rice 22:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute. Those favoring same-sex marriage rights believe that marriage rights between gays and straights should be "equal." What is so biased about calling that "marriage equality?"

Changed it back to "marriage equality." It's technically accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.72.74.67 (talk) 15:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem, 129, is evident in your phrasing: it's that those with a specific position consider it to be "equality." The fundamental issue is simply whether or not homosexuals are permitted to marry; the term "equality" is a value judgment on that point. Furthermore, the term is less informative -- which is actually more important to an encyclopedia, where we shouldn't be assuming that the reader knows what "marriage equality" refers to. -Pete 07:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, biased

Transparently pro-Anderson, which a biographical article should not be. How do you get one of those labels that says "The neutrality of this article has been disputed"? --A. Groff 72.74.3.29 05:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing unusual about how Anderson is handled. See Orrin Hatch for comparison. A biographical piece on a contemporary politician — as long as his or her career has not be scandal-ridden — almost always starts with a relatively straightforward description of the progress of that career, what stands he or she is associated with, etc. - Jmabel | Talk 23:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this article is biased, read the one on Thomas S. Monson. It reads like a pamphlet from Temple Square.

Missing notes and citation section.

The newer edition of this page does not contain the original notes or bibliography. They are both absent, though I do not believe them to be completely lost in cyberspace. Morgensternen 22:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're still there. What happened is that you added a reference without a </ref> tag. This placed the whole rest of the page inside the tag, making it disappear. Cool Hand Luke 20:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

O'Reilly move

Unless there are serious objections, I'm moving the paragraph about The O'Reilly Factor (which, like much of this article, really needs some clarifying links and perhaps some editing) to "Criticism of the Bush Administration". I might restructure the section appropriately to make things chronological. Maxisdetermined 02:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

http://www.voterocky.org/assets/pages/673/Screen_Shot_2012-11-08_at_10.01.12_AM.png AUTHORNAME. Screen shot of Rocky Anderson\'s signature. Voterocky.org. 2012-11-10. WebCite® URL: http://www.voterocky.org/assets/pages/673/Screen_Shot_2012-11-08_at_10.01.12_AM.png. Accessed: 2012-11-10. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6C5NvUqoT) Can we use it? --Pawyilee (talk)

Request for Comments

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Rocky Anderson. 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 20 external links on Rocky Anderson. 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/20071228153524/http://www.slcgov.com:80/mayor/bio.htm to http://www.slcgov.com/mayor/bio.htm

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rocky Anderson. 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) 20:58, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The Justice Party page doesn't seem to have any notability beyond Anderson's 2012 presidential campaign. I haven't been able to find any evidence of party events, membership, or other candidates who have run with the party since 2012. This leads me to believe that the party isn't really notable beyond its association with Anderson, so the articles should be merged.--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 12:55, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because Notability isn't temporary. Since the multiple, independent sources cover the part in an in-depth manner, it still passes WP:GNG.--User:Namiba 16:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namiba:Is there something I'm missing in terms of why the party is independently notable from Anderson or his 2012 run? Notability isn't temporary, but in the case of a political party I think there needs to be some standalone notability. There's very little independent coverage of the party, and what is there pretty much recognizes the party for what it really was/is: just a vehicle for Anderson's campaign to get some more credibility. Plus, a quarter of the sources are from the same TV show.--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 18:52, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would oppose a merge, myself, @Molandfreak:. I just found this article. It would seem to indicate the party is going to move away from Anderson going forward, much the way the Reform Party did away from Ross Perot. It sounds like they're planning on starting more state-level parties too. I think additional notability is likely to come if this is their plan, and it sounds like they'll be running more candidates in 2022. Also it sounds like they didn't run presidential candidates during 2016 or 2020 specifically because they didn't want to feed into a spoiler effect. I guess that could happen again, but it does sound like they're going to focus on at least some less-than-presidential elections. --Chillabit (talk) 02:10, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chillabit: I see now. I'll withdraw my request with this information.--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 11:22, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]