Talk:Robert Clive Jones

Neutrality
My impression from reading this article is that Wikipedia thinks Robert Jones is a douchebag. (And he probably is, but Wikipedia needs to be neutral.)

"(without evidence)" should go. It's original research and one-sided. So is "According to Jones, that heterosexuals dislike same-sex couples being afforded the right to marry justifies depriving same-sex couples of marriage rights."

The paragraph about the letter on sequestration seems like a selected data point, and I'm not sure if it's really notable anyway. For example, the letter is not mentioned on Loretta A. Preska's page, and she was quoted in the Washington Post about it.

It would be nice to have some more neutral or positive things that Jones has done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naptastic (talk • contribs) 23:23, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Bot-created subpage
A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/Robert Clive Jones was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot (talk) 02:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)