Talk:Kyle McCarter

"Mercy Multiplied" POV
The section "Mercy Multiplied" in this article is supported by only one (questionable) source, and has potentially harmful, POV information. More, reliable, sources should be added, or the entire section should be deleted. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 20:41, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Major newspapers are reliable sources. Please do not improperly remove material. What you are doing looks a lot like whitewashing.Lesbianadvocate (talk) 18:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


 * It may be a reliable source, but it is completely irrelevent (and inappropriate) to include this on the article of a current congressional candidate who happens to support this organization. There is absolutely no reason to include that here. If someone wants to learn more about Mercy Ministries, they can simply click on the article link on McCarter's article. Your edit in this regard seems POV. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Entire article needs work
This entire article needs a lot of work. There is a lot of potential POV, and more citations are needed. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 20:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I am going to tag the article for POV issues until we can resolve some of this. Safehaven86 (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

POV concerns in "Energy" sub-section
While I don't think it should be removed, the "Energy" sub-section, in the "Issues" section, only cites one source: an editorial. If this info should stay, it should cite a better source(s). --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kyle McCarter. 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/20090206200915/http://wgel.com/daily/2009/02-02-09.htm to http://www.wgel.com/daily/2009/02-02-09.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/illinois/article_a86223f2-9c83-596a-89a8-8525e4024699.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) 21:59, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Caption Under Image
Hi, I think the caption for the image is important in case a person with impaired eye-sight needs to read the article using accessibility mode on their gadgets. The caption is what is read out loud to them by the gadget they are using to read. AFAIK, putting children's name is not a policy violation so long as they aren't linked to any article of their own. See WP:INVALIDBIO. The example given there clearly indicates Beckham's parents aren't notable but they are put in the infobox. Gachangi (talk) 02:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Your point on the image captions seems reasonable, so I would be OK re-adding it. I would prefer a better-worded caption though, such as "Kyle McCarter in 2019" or "Official photo of McCarter", rather than "Kyle McCarter official photo," which doesn't seem well-worded.
 * I don't think INVALIDBIO means that we should add the names of unnotable children, it just says it's not prohibited to mention them anywhere in the article. But the fact still stands that most Wikipedia articles on politicians do not name the children in the infobox and rather only show the number of children. See, for example, Amata Coleman Radewagen, Mick Mulvaney, Rick Perry, and Beto O'Rourke. I continue to strongly oppose adding McCarter's kids' names to the infobox. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 03:15, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems we are agreeing on the caption bit of the article. I am going to add it. Gachangi (talk) 04:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)