Talk:Patrick Cannon

Proposed merge with Michael Barnes (American politician)
Michael Barnes (American politician) has no independent notability except interim mayor following Cannons' resignation. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree. There comes into the question of "what level of politician is inherently notable?" Generally, state legislators are considered notable just because they are state legislators.  That being said, it could be argued that a state legislator in a small district in a small state is less notable than a long-standing member of the city council of a major city. Frankly, it’s a gray area and I err on the side of there being an article for him isn’t hurting anything.  Eric Cable  |  Talk  12:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I too disagree for similar reasons as EricCable. Plus, as a matter of history, he was "acting mayor" of a large city for more than a week. That's not going to change. He was, and remains, the highest-ranking city council official and could run for mayor in the next election. 02:41, 12 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I too disagree, although I can see your reasoning. One possibility is that the investigation into Cannon spreads so big that an article is created on the controversy/investigation itself, in which case Michael Barnes (American politician) could become a section and redirect within that new article.  --Smokefoot (talk) 16:51, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * On that note if the investigation into Cannon spreads so big that an article is created on the controversy/investigation itself then Barnes could be a "major character" in that article which would add to his notability and reinforce him having his own article. Eric Cable  |  Talk  13:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

It is not disrespectful to call a felon a felon.
The current opening paragraph is accurate.

It is not "disrespectful" to call a person who has plead guilty to one or more felonies in Federal court a 'felon.' Pat Cannon knew what he was doing was wrong. He continued to do it. He defrauded the people of Charlotte. He got what he deserved. Eric Cable ! Talk 16:30, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think any experienced Wikipedia editor would suggest that Cannon should be given a free pass for what he did. Wikipedia articles, however, are not a place to attempt to try and right great wrongs. It's not our purpose to decide on whether Cannon got what he deserved, so we should try to keep the wording as neutral as possible per WP:BLP and only reflect what reliable sources say. Discussing Cannon's arrest in the article (even in the lead) seems perfectly fine to me, but referring to him as an "American felon", while true, seems a bit WP:UNDUE. It seems much more encyclopedic to word the lead sentence as something like "Patrick Damon Cannon is an American politician who served as mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina from November 2013 until he resigned from office in March 2014 after being arrested for accepting bribes from undercover FBI agents." This is just one suggestion, but there's an entire category of article written about use politicians who have been convicted of crimes (Category:American politicians convicted of crimes) which can be used as a guide for developing a more suitable version of the lead.  -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's WP:UNDUE weight to put "felon" before "politician". Oh and I love how it was called accurate in spite of the first sentence containing "is a an". – Muboshgu (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Patrick Cannon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131112145152/http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/11/05/4442483/charlotte-mayor-patrick-cannon.html to http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/11/05/4442483/charlotte-mayor-patrick-cannon.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:20, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Inmate number, etc.
I don't the inmate number is needed for the reader to understand that Cannon was convicted and sentenced to prison. The reader's understanding is significantly approved by the inclusion of such information; not everything that is true needs to be included per WP:NOTEVERYTHING. If there was some kind of special significance to this number other than simply being used as an identification number, then I could see mentioning it. All inmates, however, are assigned such numbers for identification purposes so I think there's anything unusual or special about that when it comes to Cannon. Moreover, the wording "Now federal inmate number 29396-058" does not seem very encyclopedic and a little bit of MOS:OPED and MOS:RELTIME. It's fine for the Charlotte Observer reporter to write in such a way, but it's not really suitable for Wikipedia. I think the version that came up with  is pretty good since it reflects what the source says in a neutral tone without adding unnecessary bits of information.

In addition, to the above "Inmate locator"  citation seems to be a primary source of little value so it does not seem to be needed per WP:BLPPRIMARY. Cannon may be a convicted felon, but he is still alive and thus this article is still subject to WP:BLP. The source isn't really helpful to begin with because it only leads the reader to a page where they have to enter either Cannon's name or inmate number to see the relevant information. After doing that, all the reader will see is Cannon's full name (the page lists a different middle name for him than the article by the way), his age, his sex, his race, where he's incarcerated and his release date which is all information which can be obtained from secondary sources already cited in the article. -- 05:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)