Talk:Tommy Norment

W&M salary stuff
The only source which is remotely within Wikipedia guidelines is #8: http://www.roanoke.com/news/breaking/wb/222749. Everything else is original synthesis. Perhaps there is a little something here, or perhaps not. Depends if there are any other sources making a similar analysis. But you can't cite a course catalog itself and make claims about what it does not contain. You can't compare this case to Hamilton outside what the Roanoke Times article is doing. Citing articles about Hamilton that don't mention Norment are off topic or original synthesis. Citing course catalogs are not appropriate sources and original synthesis. Please read up on WP:BLP and WP:V/WP:RS and WP:NOR before preceding. If it wasn't for the Roanoke Times article, I'd say all of your content was in violation of basic Wikipedia rules, but you may be on to something, if presented in an appropriate, neutral, and verifiable manner, in accordance with BLP standards.-Andrew c [talk] 16:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes - the Roanoke TImes is the only legitimate source, but it doesn't come close to supporting the allegations the IP editor was making. The Roanoke Times just points out that they were both legislators drawing salaries from universities; otherwise, it distinguishes the two cases.  While I am generally sceptical of politicians, I don't see anything reliable to indicate that there is something worth covering here.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)