Talk:Dannel Malloy

Poll number
No other regional governor that I could find has their approval rating listed in their opening paragraph, and it seemed unnecessary/quickly outdated information. --47.16.84.230 (talk) 00:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Towns he lost Vs Won
I am looking for the towns he won vs the towns he lost. Malloy lost to Tom Foley bad in most small towns (both times) yet that factoid has been edited out here. How many were there again? In the entry for the 2014 race, that number too has been taken out -- probably by the Malloy campaign. Now that the race is over, can we be more objective? --68.118.188.188 (talk) 14:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

This page is written like a political ad...
I'm sure staffers for Malloy will complain, but it is a fact that Malloy has pledge to sign a bill giving driving licenses to illegal immigrants. For those of us foolish enough to have served in the military, handing out licenses to people who are deliberately violating American laws is lunacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.97.69.229 (talk) 17:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Some mention should be made of his negatives as well, including but not limited to the recent misleading campaign advertising mentioned at http://www.courant.com/community/stamford/hc-malloy-jobs-0628-20100628,0,480540.story —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.109.53 (talk) 23:48, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

>>> Items relating to the city of Stamford, opinion, and statistics are not relevant to Malloy. Responsibility for city growth has come from many sources (Malloy included), BUT there is not a definitive way to dictate his part in this. As such these parts should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.204.106 (talk) 22:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

>>> Strongly agree; the neutrality of this post should be disputed. Andrewseal (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a campaign staffer removed the tag. Should be watched to ensure no further shenanigans.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.109.168 (talk) 13:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I took down most of the language that made the article read like an advertisement, such as the in-article links to Malloy's campaign page and the frequent mentions of "a 2 to 1 margin," "the loser," or "opponent." I added the actual endorsement vote results, and in many instances, replaced language--such as "the loser"--that referred to Malloy's opponent, Ned Lamont, with Lamont's name. Also, true to my Wikipedia ID, I corrected several grammatical errors. I will watch the article and hope we can remove the tags shortly. J1.grammar natz (talk) 02:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Added the job statistics facts
I put them right under a similar (but positive) statement of statistics with a similar format. Might want to keep an eye on it in case a campaign staffer decides to whitewash this page again.71.232.109.168 (talk) 23:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep he tried to remove the information while leaving only positive stuff. No comment was made on the edit, just a simple whitewashing. 71.232.109.168 (talk) 14:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, it happened again. Wish I knew more about how wikipedia works so I could add an alert when he has someone from the campaign come on and sanitize the article. 71.232.109.168 (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Formatting
I added the usual candidate links and usual section names, but that was reverted by SoGr82CU2. I've re-added the links, but left the format structure as is because I really don't want to have to add yet another article to my watch list, and this seems to be a contentious group of people. You may want to look at the article of the Republican nominee for formatting ideas. Flatterworld (talk) 03:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Pretty please, could you consider watching it until the election? Campaign staff have been going nuts in here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.109.168 (talk) 05:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Family
There is a brewing edit war on Malloy's Family section. Malloy's son Ben has had more than one run-in with the law, with the incidents being reported in Connecticut media. Some people feel this is worthy of inclusion on Dan Malloy's page, including the user GumShoe777 (contribs), who has been complaining to Wikipedia administrators when people remove the paragraphs about Ben's legal trouble. Personally, I don't think the paragraphs about Ben are appropriate on Dan's page, I don't feel they are relevant. Also, I think they contradict the WP:BLPNAME policy. That states "Consider whether the inclusion of names of private living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons." Given that policy, it seems clear that the paragraphs about Ben should be removed. Someone else chime in here please.--MikeUMA (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The election is over, and GumShoe777 will surely disappear. At a minimum, the discussion of Ben Malloy should greatly condensed; it doesn't warrant the seven sentences that are currently present. Billyboy01 (talk) 19:52, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

GumShoe777 is back, trying again to get his Ben Malloy paragraphs onto the page. Another user has already removed them, under the same WP:BLPNAME policy that I referenced earlier. Puzzling why GumShoe777 keeps trying.--MikeUMA (talk) 02:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Dannel
This page should be edited and forwarded to be headlined "Dannel Malloy," as this is his preferred and proper name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyemyke (talk • contribs) 14:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * "Dannel Malloy" already redirects here. If Malloy truly preferred to be called "Dannel," I would support moving the article to that title. However, as far as I can tell, he has never shown a preference to use his legal name instead of just "Dan." In fact, the official ballots listed him as "Dan," not "Dannel." --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 06:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Criticism of other Governors
Is this really needed? I don't see it at as that significant. Politicians criticize other politicians all the time. I do not think it was a huge news story. Thoughts?--Politicsislife (talk) 01:25, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree. One reason that such information was added to this article is probably because Malloy is still a new governor and hasn't really done anything else major yet that is worth including. Politicians definitely do criticize each other all the time -- it's all part of the art of politics, I suppose. Since there have been no objections, I will remove the mention. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 08:30, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm adding it back. As of today, the article offers zero mention of anything Malloy has done since taking office. In addition, the dispute over collective bargaining is among the major national issues of 2011, and is not an obscure local concern or an issue likely to fade in salience over the years. Malloy himself fancies himself the anti-Chrisite. So why isn't it relvant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.179.186.36 (talk) 00:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest removing the section again. It reads as sort of a hit piece. I would possibly include the last comment regarding special needs, and title it controversies, but the above is not extremely relevant to the article.--Politicsislife (talk) 03:58, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

With all due respect, I think some of that information is worth bringing back. Though the section, as I recall it, was starting to read like a hit piece, Dan Malloy is well-known for an aggressive, pull-no-punches debating style. He has national notoriety for this. For instance, when he called Ron Paul "an idiot" on national television, one of the anchors commented that it was refreshing to see a politician speak so frankly and not beat around the bush. More recently, he gained national attention for his confrontation with Bobby Jindal on the White House lawn. Malloy is a rising star in the Democratic Party who has been mentioned as a possible (but by no means likely) presidential candidate in 2016, or (more likely) someone whom the Democratic nominee in 2016 will consider as a potential running mate. I have a feeling that even if he ends up not being re-elected to his current office this November, we will not have seen the last of him. His popularity at the national level is, no doubt, owing in no small part to his no-nonsense persona -- a persona that his criticisms of other governors captures perfectly. For this reason, I plan to restore the criticism section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HannaBarberaFanatic (talk • contribs) 03:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't see how a "controversial comments" section belongs on anyone's page, unless they really gained national notoriety for it. Responding to comments from members of the opposing party really don't warrant mentioning, especially when a governor is responding to comments from out-of-state politicians. At most, the fact that Malloy has occasionally appeared on national tv and allegedly has a blunt personality should receive a couple sentences under tenure or 2014 elections. Orser67 (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Political Views
What are your thoughts about adding a section describing Dan Malloy's position on major issues? (capital punishment, same-sex marriage, social programs, taxation and spending, gun control) 76.18.79.175 (talk) 14:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Identifying the political views of political figures on Wikipedia articles is definitely an important thing to do, so long as they are attributed to reliable sources and, in Malloy's case, do not violate BLP policies. Feel free to contribute. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 08:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I just had an admin remove my edits describing aspects Malloy's liberal social agenda, which is very well documented and an important aspect of his administration, see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomerang456 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Political views on important issues are an asset to any politician, of course. So when you are editing a politician's profile - make sure you add sections in a way that they are unbiased.   You must realize that some people may be for or against, so use neutral wording.


 * If you do see a section on a well referenced controversial issue that is biased either pro or anti issue, you should edit to remove the bias rather than delete the information.  Surely, an issue that is civil rights in nature must be an asset to a politician.   It shows that he is concerned about the rights of certain people, rights that definitely should be protected at all costs.  Opinions that this politician has - are central to his administration - a politician's stands, morals, opinions, and values - are central to his or her success or failure in office - they also are who the politician is.   There is no reason they should be deleted, rather, especially if they are truly his well-documented opinions and viewpoints - they should be cleaned up to be unbiased ... and posted for all to see.   If you disagree with the presentation of a certain portion of factual, true, and well referenced information - please, by all means, clean up the information so it is more neutral, and present it in a neutral fashion.  If you think the presentation of material that is a steadfast position of this politician is "bad" or "damaging" to his reputation, then YOU are biased in attempting to conceal facts.   Such an attempt to hide factual information based on your political viewpoints is an unethical practice, and should not have a place on Wikipedia.  Such actions degrade Wikipedia's legitimacy.  Facts are facts, they are black and white - no matter if they are positive to the reputation or negative to the reputation of a subject.   I'm positive we all can draw our own opinions based on the actual facts presented - whether they are positive or negative in nature.   Present, and let the reader draw their conclusions.  --Kyanwan (talk) 00:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

A Bit One-Sided . ..
Someone in another section of this talk page says that the article reads like a political ad, and I have to agree. Huge blanket statements like "the city has greatly improved" are not exactly NPOV. Random facts about how great Stamford is, such as the city's accomplishments within the field of education, are also inappropriate if they don't include a context of how or even if Mr. Malloy was involved with it.

Sorry to disappoint die-hard Malloy fans, but I added a brief mention of the Stamford fire department debacle, which Malloy was directly responsible for and was one of several central aspects of the latter part of his administration as mayor of Stamford. I tried to word it as neutrally as possible, but it's entirely relevant to his mayorship, and any attempt to white-wash it out is just plain dishonest. Minaker (talk) 02:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * This statement has no context and sticks out like a sore thumb. If this issue is discussed, all issues of equal import should be discussed about his mayoral tenure. As it stands, the paragraph here is a 50k foot view, and then zooms in on a single issue (which may or may not be important, who knows?) for no apparent reason.172.113.241.46 (talk) 16:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Picture
Can someone add a picture of Dan Malloy? He is the only current governor that does not have a picture with his article. Airplanegod (talk) 02:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a photo from FEMA. Not the best image, but the only free one I could find. GabrielF (talk) 04:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Additional info for tenure section
Governor Malloy received national coverage for his handling of Hurricane Sandy and the tragic events at Sandy Hook. It seems mentions of these should be made in the tenure section.Politicsislife (talk) 05:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC) I completely agree. He's recieved a lot of coverage from Hurricanes Irene and Sandy, the Sandy Hook horror and the Nor'easters. These should be mentioned briefly. 74.69.11.229 (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)== Additional info for tenure section ==

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dannel Malloy. 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/20141013005918/http://www.statementofvote-sots.ct.gov/StatementOfVote/WebModules/ReportsLink/OfficeTitle.aspx to http://www.statementofvote-sots.ct.gov/StatementOfVote/WebModules/ReportsLink/OfficeTitle.aspx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:10, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 October 2017
Add about his children's criminal records. http://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Racist-threats-case-filed-by-Stamford-High-107476.php 2606:6000:CE05:59F0:BC71:8A56:2D61:AE17 (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sparkling Pessimist   Scream at me!  18:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dannel Malloy. 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/20141015065815/http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/m/a/l/William-F-Malloy/FILE/0001text.txt to http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/m/a/l/William-F-Malloy/FILE/0001text.txt
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717033928/http://thestamfordtimes.com/story/464494 to http://thestamfordtimes.com/story/464494
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121030211934/http://www.ctnow.com/weather/hurricane/hc-townbytown-evacuations-20121028,0,1651268.story to http://www.ctnow.com/weather/hurricane/hc-townbytown-evacuations-20121028,0,1651268.story

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:47, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Dan and Cathy Malloy.jpg