Talk:Jim Edgar

Untitled
I'm still not sure why my picture of the former gov was deleted. I'm going to put it back, using the same license I always do for Wikipedia. If anyone has issue, please leave a note on my talk page. Mitch (talk) 13:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Second run as governor...
Has anyone else heard that Edgar has considered running for governor again? If he does, I'm sure he would win, because many remember when he was governor the first time, and he's not that old- same age as Bush and Clinton. He apparently was on KMOX, and said he was considering running again, but hasn't made a decision. Did anyone else hear this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.206.21.58 (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Terrible photo must be replaced
Would someone please find a new photo of Jim Edgar to place on this article? The current one is terrible, as it is extremely blurry and is unpleasant to look at. 1990&#39;sguy (talk) 22:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Jim Edgar. 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 tag to http://www.igpa.uiuc.edu/person/jim-edgar
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081218214756/http://www.igpa.uiuc.edu:80/media/edgar-blagojevich to http://www.igpa.uiuc.edu/media/edgar-blagojevich

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:13, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jim Edgar. 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/20070930014437/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=ebd6ae3effb81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=ebd6ae3effb81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107164817/http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/former_ill_gov_edgar_endorses.html to http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/former_ill_gov_edgar_endorses.html

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) 08:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Edgar Ramp
There appears to be a concerted effort to obscure the "Edgar Ramp" topic from this article. Anonymous edits had the absurd effect of a subheading about the "Edgar Ramp" which nowhere explains what the Edgar Ramp is. These edits appear to be vandalism. If it continues, there may need to be steps taken to preserve the information in this article. The article now includes an unbiased description of the Edgar Ramp, with citations of the SEC report and also of a Chicago Tribune article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbelknap (talk • contribs) 14:17, November 3, 2018 (UTC)
 * The material in the lead concerning this is a BLP violation. It is an improperly sourced and weasel worded. "Many observers have noted in recent years  that Edgar was one of the primary politicians responsible..." That's a negative BLP comment and it requires much stronger sourcing than provided. Which observers? How many? The source certainly does not .answer this, or even . We discuss the issues in a section of the article, but this lead statement appears to be POV. and is not appropriate, Note that the identical claims were added by the same IP (currently blocked)  to the leads of five different politicians' pages. Meters (talk) 05:06, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BLP violation?! Facts are facts. It is objectively true that "many observers" have noted that Governor Edgar started the pension crisis, which is arguably the most important current issue in Illinois politics. It is clearly not NPOV to exclude this from the lede. You ask that individual observers be named, which appears to be a requirement that primary sources be cited. Perhaps that would be OK in this context, but we don't typically cite primary sources, or if we do, we emphasize secondary or tertiary sources. The citation you deleted is a secondary source. I will try to fix. See what you think. Sbelknap (talk) 22:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes it was an BLP violation. It was an improperly sourced negative statement about a living person. If many people blame Edgar for the issue then provide reliable sources that prove that. The cited source did not do that.
 * I have removed it again.. Couching it in terms of the "Edgar Ramp" rather than pointing the finger directly at Edgar is WP:UNDUE. We discuss the ramp in the article and the fact that it was named for him because he was Governor at the time. That does not warrant putting it in the lead. The article is about the person, not the ramp, and your edit seemed to be implying that he was to blame. Meters (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * There may be some justification for this material if properly source wrt Edgar, but it was added as part of a series of obvious BLP violating POV edits by an SPA IP who claimed that each of five politicians was one of the primary politicians responsible. Some of those claims were very weak, and I'm not giving the Edgar edit the benefit of the doubt. No WP:WEASEL wording, no grandiose statements based on one writer's article, and no implying that he's responsible by stuffing a discussion of something that happens to be named for him into the lead. Meters (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It would be fair to mention both positive aspects and negative aspects of the Governor's tenure in the lede. Positive aspects include short-term balancing of budget, funding of the public Universities, and favorable business climate. Negative aspects include the MSI scandal and the initiation of the Illinois Fiscal Crisis. The current lede doesn't have much information at all, at all…Sbelknap (talk) 00:50, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Weak lead
The lead is bare bones. It would be improved with mentions of the key events of the Governor's tenure. This info is in the main article and is well-cited. sbelknap (talk) 17:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)