Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Arpaio The True Story
- subject noteworthy and has NPOV (?) article: Joe Arpaio. Delete. --Ianb 06:35, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Looks like the other one could use some cleanup. --ssd 06:48, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Hysterically ridiculous, but mostly ridiculous. Arminius 07:18, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I started reading with 'merge non-rant content' in mind, but got as far as "Joe Arpaio has made a name for himself, literally, as "America's Toughest Sheriff."" (What did he make it out of? How? Are there any photographs of it?) before giving up. Delete - TB 08:34, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)
- (Maybe he got a belt buckle with that written on it at the state fair.) At any rate, the article is extremely POV, right down to the first-person section at the end. Delete. Spatch 16:25, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- He has been billed as a prototypical "Tough Sheriff" in numerous news accounts and has been featured in many newspaper articles, including the New York Times and USA Today. He is currently in the news for publicly broadcasting prisoners being booked and being held over webcams. - Centrx 18:52, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- More of the pathetic war against Joe Arpaio. Not that I have any dog in this fight, mind you - but bringing the war to wikipedia is what's pathetic. Delete. --Golbez 17:13, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- merge the two articles. Part of NPOV is giving all/both sides. Sheriff Arpaio is not a universally loved person here in Maricopa County. --Vik-Thor 16:34, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Comment: Have you read the original Joe Arpaio article? Last check, it DID mention such complaints, though they are typically caught in an edit war and thus present NPOV may not be preserved. Of course, I could be wrong, not being intimately familiar with Maricopa politics. --Golbez 17:06, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The mention of such complaints in the "original" article were mine - the author insisted on deleting all my comments. I did attempt to merge the two articles, but apparently the author of the original is adverse to telling the whole story insisting upon reporting only a positive slant to a subject that has much more to it. I found the original to be more in the flavor of a benign, fact-lacking propaganda piece. I would love to know if you would label history books and historical literature about Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and the like as "rants"!? They do after all report all the atrocities commited by these maniacs.
I have been accused of making libelous remarks, ranting, and even copying directly from other sites (several of which I personally wrote the original content for), despite the fact that everything I wrote has been meticulously documented. Instead of embracing the true, unadulterated facts of a story, article, report, whatever you want to call it, my journalistic integrity has been questioned by people who know few of the facts - and even less of my character.
Perhaps having someone besides myself (Vik-Thor, Centrx), suggest the true character of this individual will make a difference. Perhaps, critics checking out the numerous media outlets who have also reported similar facts about this man, and his increasingly illegal activities, will have some effect on the perception that I am somehow making it all up, or exaggerating on some level.
By the way, 'TB' and 'Spatch' if you cannot find anything but cheesy comments to make about an extremely common figure of speech - why bother saying anything at all. It is common knowledge that Arpaio labeled himself as "America's Toughest Sheriff" then attributed the origin of the name to the media. 'Arminius' - if the activities of this person were not so horrendous it would be ridiculous. The problem is that the facts are true. Unfortunately, people who refuse to address these issues as serious are the reason they are allowed to continue - and people continue to be injured. [The latest beating in MCSO jails was an 80 yr. old man]
- I don't think you understand TB's problem with the use of the word "literally". RickK 07:02, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)