Talk:Richard A. White

History
As I am adding info on White's time at BART (haven't even gotten to WMATA yet) I am pulling more news articles and realizing that this stuff might belong in a separate "History of BART" article or some such thing. I'll likely get around to that at some point but meanwhile I'll just stick all that stuff in here. Massysett 19:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Wait! Don't make a "History of BART" page...the main Bay Area Rapid Transit article already has some history in it which may be worth splitting into another article. I shall look at that...

NPOV
The article seems to be somewhat invasive in that it displays White's salary, which if it were for a lower-ranking official might be considered a privacy violation. Also, I think that White left WMATA voluntarily. 69.140.157.138
 * Salary information for public officials is considered public information, and thus there's no invasion of privacy by including it in the article. Additionally, this article from the Washington Post confirms that White was dismissed from Metro. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * While the facts may be correct, the overall slant of the article is to portray the subject in a somewhat negative light. 68.50.203.109 18:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you provide examples of the negative "slant" in the article? I read over the whole thing, and it sounds neutral to me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Seeing no response, I've removed the tag. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Did Mr. White have any substantial accomplishments as general manager of Metro? From reading the article, it would appear the answer is "no." It is unclear whether that is because of a negative slant of the article, or whether Mr. White truly failed as General Manager. 69.140.173.15 01:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I came here from WP:3O. Salary should be no problem if properly cited, which it is not. "White revealed his temper in public" without citation is certainly POV. I don't see big POV problems—if it's unbalanced and leaning against him, the right solution would be to add missing favorable material—but I see a big problem with lack of specific citation. WP:BLP really means that an article like this should have explicit citation for just about every statement that is currently in this article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)