Talk:Ed Koch/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Death

He died a few hours ago. This talks about what it says on his tombstone. How does he have one this quickly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.140.111.250 (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

One of the sources talks about him buying his grave in a Christian church's graveyard some time ago because he wanted to be buried in Manhattan, and it was the only space left. At the same time, he had his tombstone created (and erected, IIRC). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:40, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Birth

"Koch was born in The Bronx, New York City, at NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital." This sentence is confusing because NYPH didn't exist when Koch was born and NYPH isn't in the Bronx. Take it out? Or correct it? I'd assume he was born at either New York Hospital or Presbyterian Hospital or some other hospital that was merged to create NYPH today. And is there a standard for citing where someone is "born" based on the location of the hospital or mother's residence at time of birth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.151.2.10 (talk) 14:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The common sense and actual US standard is where the delivery occurred. 72.228.190.243 (talk) 05:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Naturally. If his mother just happened to be visiting Timbuktoo and went into premature labour, we'd say he was born in Timbuktoo, because he was. It would be absurd to say he was born in the Bronx, New York, USA, merely because his mother had her house there. Apply that same general principle to cases where the distance between home and birth is less, and hey presto. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 06:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Profile Photo of Ed Koch in Info Box is not the best possible photo

The Info Box photo of Ed Koch shows the person in profile. A profile photo hides half of the person's face and is not really a good idea. This photograph should be replace with a full featured photograph.

The photograph of Koch reminds me of something that occurred when I was in grammar school more than 50 years ago. One of the students had a deformed eye, and his yearbook photo was shown in profile. That WAS a legitimate reason for photographing and displaying somebody's face in profile. In the case of Ed Koch, it would be more appropriate for his entire face to appear in the photograph.

Anthony22 (talk) 14:17, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

It looks to be the best available from Wikimedia Commons...do you know of a better one?  Frank  |  talk  17:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

I know of a lot of better ones, but I cannot upload any of them because I am not the author.

Anthony22 (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

aids politics

Can we please leave the as if they were factual criticisms of Koch's AIDS spending out of the lead and position that since he was indeed gay, which we do not know, he should have spent more money on AIDS, which is a value judgment? It's fine to add attributed criticisms to the body of the article. It's not acceptible to add them to the lead as if they were fact. μηδείς (talk) 01:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

After listening to your post, I have added a line stating, more factually, that many in the gay community criticized him for his policy on AIDs. Hope this is something you can live with. I am open to edits, but I would ask that Koch's term as mayor be open to such a minimal consideration of gay rights in the lead as the lead gives mention to the issue of racial violence that perhaps affected results with regards to Mayor Dinkins. In the latter case, the link between Koch's personal life and that issue is much more tenuous than that of AIDs and gay rights. cp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.67.116.174 (talk) 02:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

suggestion for new opening paragraph as part of reshaping lead

hi, to the contributor who wanted to rework the lead, here is my suggestion for a new opening paragraph for the lead. My aim was to provide a context for interpreting Koch's life for readers, and to present them with reasons why his life is still interesting, as a source of much debate. Let me know what you think 24.67.116.174 (talk) 23:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)



Edward Irving "Ed" Koch (pron.: /ˈkɒtʃ/; December 12, 1924 – February 1, 2013) was an American politician, who served in the United States House of Representatives for five terms from 1969 to 1977, and most famously as mayor of New York City for three terms from 1978 to 1989, focusing on a return to fiscal solvency which coincided with the economic upturn of that period. Koch also worked as a lawyer, political commentator, movie critic and reality television arbitrator. His political career speaks volumes to the time during which he was mayor, as the era where the full realization of civil rights for women, African-Americans and ethnic minorities, gays and lesbians were demanded and shaped a new, more inclusive social norm, at the same time as social stratification impacted the city. As mayor he was able to negotiate these changes with his often brash style, with what appears to be, judged over the time of his mayoralty, to be sometimes paradoxical stances and efforts. Ultimately his career as elected official ended in 1989, perhaps because his method of dealing with these various political streams was no longer in tune with a sufficient part of the electorate.[52]

A lead paragraph is supposed to summarize the whole article, not to present certain points in essay style. The civil rights issues would have to be a significant portion of the article before they would get such prominence in the lead, and even then not the first paragraph. As it is the half sentence mention of racial tension is okay because it explains his loss to Dinkins and the half sentence on gay activist opinion of him makes sense because of the longstanding question of his sexuality. I suggest rather that you gather good (not just partisan) sources discussing specific civil rights issues relevant to him as mayor and begin a new section> μηδείς (talk) 20:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


Koch, gay issues, and the discussion of his closeted life

hello, to the person who is moving what I have written to personal life and legacy (I still have to look to see if you have removed legacy from that section). May I ask a huge favor of you? As you have taken the step of placing what I have written in another part of the article, rather than simply erase it, I take your amendments as friendly, and thank you for them. However, the mounting evidence, first that of a very colored record on gay rights and public health policies, combined with second, his apparently closeted life, does warrant discussion or mention, in my view, in the first section. So, would you be so kind as to place at least a sentence about this in the opening section? Thanks very much, I look forward to a response, either here or by inserting a sentence or two on this topic in the opening section. greetings, ~~cp~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.67.116.174 (talk) 01:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The sentence you have added is reasonable, although I would probably change it to "some gay new yorkers" because not all gays or gay publications are liberal or supported AIDS spending, etc., e.g., Christopher Street Magazine. I eventually want to change around that third paragraph because it lumps together minority politics and the general election results, but the essence of what you have said is okay. μηδείς (talk) 02:08, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I have made the change you suggested, as I am sure that it was not just liberals who were dismayed by his policies on gay issues. Your desire to change around that third paragraph makes sense, and I would egg you on to actually change the whole lead. I think Ed Koch is a fascinating, and important figure, not just because he was mayor of New York, nor because of the city's movement to financial health during his time as mayor. As we know from the Clinton administration era, part of it was the Clinton admin's actions, but a large part (larger part?) was the economic situation in general that lead to a better fiscal balance for the US government. Likewise for Koch and New York.

So what I find interesting is how a combination of fiscal restraint and social projects/plans, in the nexus of the emergence of "minority politics" leads him to be both a popular figure, and one with many paradoxes. Maybe I am not expressing it well, but he seems important to me because he is a larger-than-life reflection of the dichotomies of that period. Whether he was gay or not, and it does indeed seem that he was closeted, is irrelevant in a sense (but not in the sense that he felt and acted as if being known to be gay would ruin his political career), as the tortured nature of his gay politics (i.e. as a politician addressing gay rights issues rather than as the politics of a gay man (since he didn't declare himself to be gay, he didn't can't have that sort of gay politics) is expressive of a time when openness about sexuality was becoming an issue. (And please don't forget, that openness has also played a role in allowing victims of sexual abuse to finally come forward.) Likewise the issues surrounding social policy, and the issues of race relations, they are all brewing heavily while he is mayor, and his response is very much one of the times, some advances, some retreats, much negotiating his career in the political tides. cp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.67.116.174 (talk) 02:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

That section is one long hotch-potch of insinuations, factoids and gossip. There's nothing solid whatsoever in there on whether Koch was gay - just allegations coming either from people who were against him for other political reasons (Cuomo's campaign people) or gay activists who have an axe to grind. And the documentary that tried to out a number of politicians and accuse them of hypocrisy is not a reliable or noteworthy source for anything.
It's completely immaterial to this argument whether one approves of gay rights, or personally likes gay sexual practices, or not. Personally I approve of LGBT's having the same civil rights as everyone else, but that doesn't excuse pseudo-journalism or unfounded gossip to push some particular activists' sense of self-importance, neither in a newspaper, nor as getting cited in an encyclopaedia and sold as verifiable truth or whatever. The whole section should be deleted or severely cut back. 83.254.151.33 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Rent-controlled abuser

I think more should be mentioned about Ed Koch abusing the rent-control housing system. He's a typical snake in that area but when you combine it to him being a politician who did little for the working classes he is real first-class scum.101.51.232.159 (talk) 00:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Corruption scandal in year 1986

This is missing here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.166.104.221 (talk) 15:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean the one that is covered in the '1985 election and third term' section of the article? --Onorem (talk) 15:50, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Odd, nothing at all about crime

Crime is all over the Dinkins article.

Yet there is not a mention of crime in the Koch article, even though it was during Koch's long tenure that crime gradually rose, and it was during Dinkins's short tenure that the big drop-off began.

It's also odd that someone deleted the comment you are reading now and I had to manually re-insert it.69.120.202.82 (talk) 13:22, 7 November 2013 (UTC)captcrisis

What happened to the Section "Tombstone" and the photograph of Ed Koch's gravesite

I'm just wondering why the section "Tombstone" and the photograph of Ed Koch's burial site disappeared from the article. I have seen many photographs vanish from Wikipedia articles. I don't understand the logic to this kind of editing. As a matter of fact, there's no point to uploading photos to articles and creating new text if the edits are going to be reverted.

Anthony22 (talk) 18:28, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@Anthony22: It looks like it was removed with this edit by Rjensen; perhaps the page does not need the long explanation of the inscription, but something should be mentioned about the error on his tombstone. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@Rjensen: Re "Koch was dead when the error was made --it happens to the best of people and should not be enshrined here as memorable"; I'm not sure how that is relevant; an error on a notable/historical figure's tombstone is notable. If they misspelled Abraham Lincoln's name on the Lincoln Memorial, it would be mentioned on its page. Not mentioning this error is a historical omission. I get not mentioning the whole explanation of his epitaph(which seems self-evident) and I don't seek to restore that. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The Lincoln memorial was done over a period of years long after Lincoln was dead with many people watching closely. Koch's tombstone was done in a few days by one unnamed artisan who made a trivial typo error that was quickly fixed. Rjensen (talk) 14:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
I respect your views but I disagree that this is "trivial"; the error was discussed in RS and not including it here does a disservice to future readers who will be denied the opportunity to learn about this aspect of his death. 331dot (talk) 14:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
there are 9999 other facts about Koch that we skip over. This one simply ridicules him. Rjensen (talk) 14:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Who is ridiculing anyone? (especially Koch) It simply states the documented facts. Koch would probably find it amusing, not as ridicule. If there are 9999 facts that are cited and noteworthy I don't see why they shouldn't be included if they provide notable insight. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sympathetic to leaving out the mistake on the date, as it was corrected. But shouldn't we mention the words of Daniel Pearl that he put on the monument? [1] By the way, that article calls it an Episcopalian cemetery while we say it is non-denominational. We should check this, too. Jason from nyc (talk) 21:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Update: I see conflicting reports as to whether the cemetery is non-denominational or Episcopal. It is still controlled by Trinity Church on Wall Street. However, this Episcopal journal [2] calls it non-denominational and I believe that settles it.
The article also mentions the last words of Daniel Pearl on the tombstone: "My father is Jewish. My mother is Jewish. I am Jewish." Koch said "that those words are 'as important as the most holy of all statements in Jewish ritual,' adding that they ought to be said by Jews 'every Saturday night.'" I believe that those words are more important than his not wanting to be buried in New Jersey. Jason from nyc (talk) 15:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ed Koch. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:43, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Ed Koch. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ed Koch. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ed Koch. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:33, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Appearance in The Critic

An animated caricature of Ed Koch appeared in The Critic episode "L.A. Jay", as an 80 foot monster destroying New York (while repeating "How'm I doin'?") in a spoof of Ghostbusters. Time code is 21:10.Thealienhand (talk) 16:25, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

WP:IPCV. Has a third-party source taken note of this appearance? DonIago (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

It is mentioned here: https://thefw.com/mayor-ed-koch-passes-away/ here: https://www.cartoonbrew.com/shorts/ed-koch-rip-77336.html here: https://theentertainmentnut.wordpress.com/2016/07/14/retro-recaps-the-critic-season-1-episode-9-l-a-jay/ and here: http://www.criticalcommons.org/Members/spookcentral/clips/ghostbusters-3-reference-in-the-critic/view Thealienhand (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

NYC MAYOR'S PRIVATE SECTOR SURVEY

Mayor Koch created this in 1988, through Frank Cary, CEO of IBM, to formulate ideas for improving the operations of NYC government. The group of about one hundred managers and professionals from NYC industrial and financial companies, with Price Waterhouse guidance, made many recommendations. They were passed along to the new mayor, David Dinkins, in 1989 (as had been done previously with the Grace Commission report for the Federal government in 1984). Ref. "NYC Private Sector Survey" by Paul J. Kofmehl & Edward Sermier. PUBLIC PRODUCTIVITY AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW, v15 n2 68.193.250.255 (talk) 23:05, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ed_Koch/Archive_2&oldid=1136688556"