Talk:Joseph Todaro Sr./Archives/2013

Untitled
This is much better. It states the facts that can be verified and nothing more. Little Joe Shots certainly knew of a lot more but for the sake of being encyclopedic this is exactly what we need. Good work, Alexbonaro 04:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Tone of Article
Once again the article has an informal tone. The worst example being "Centro Anni!" at the end of the article - a salutation of Todaro's successful career. The article must give up facts if they can not be cited - unfortunately it just doesn't seem like this article can have all of the information Little Joe knows about Todaro without getting sources for all those statements and receiving a major cleanup. Sorry Little Joe, you know far more than the rest of us but Wikipedia has these guidelines. Alexbonaro 23:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Alexbonaro
This article is really a PR piece for this guy Todaro plus it is way too long for a person of his importance.Rogermx 20:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

POV tag
This is about tag cleanup. As all of the tags are more than a year old, there is no current discussion relating to them, and there is a great deal of editing done since the tags were placed, or in some cases it's clear there is a consensus, they will be removed. This is not a judgement of content. If there is cause to re-tag, then that of course may be done, with the necessary posting of a discussion as to why, and what improvements could be made. Better yet, edit the article yourself with the improvements in place. This is only an effort to clean out old tags, and permit them to be updated with current issues if warranted.Jjdon (talk) 00:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Lack of neutrality
This article is clearly biased towards the subject and violates Wikipedia standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.100.175.243 (talk) 20:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)