Talk:Hilda Solis begins new job as US Secretary of Labor
Contents |
Review revision 774087 [edit]
 |
Revision 774087 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: Do we have a Washington insider in our midst? --SVTCobra 00:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Original reporting notes [edit]
I attended this event, counted the crowd and listened to the secretary speak. Evrik (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Employees? [edit]
A reference is made to 'employees' in the third paragraph but does not say what employees working for who: Solis' arrival was announced on Wednesday to all employees who were invited to attend an informal gathering to greet her on her first day. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Attribute pov statements [edit]
"she is seen as being pro-worker, after years of business-friendly leadership under the Bush Administration." This is an opinion. It must to be attributed to someone. Please read WN:NPOV and WN:WEASEL. --SVTCobra 21:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
-
- "We’ve heard tell that after eight years of the Bush administration, employees in more than one federal governmental department have welcomed the new Obama team members as though they were a liberating force. Yesterday, the welcome was especially heartwarming when employees greeted Labor Department Secretary Hilda Solis, confirmed just two days ago."[1]
- "Solis was also heard telling some in the crowd 'It's time to put labor back in the Department of Labor.'"[2]
- "Labor groups have been aggressively pushing for Solis, 51, who is to begin work today. She gives the department, with an annual budget of about $53 billion and nearly 17,000 employees, a decidedly pro-worker tilt after years of business-friendly leadership under the Bush administration."[3]
- How many more sources do you need? In retrospect, the language used may be too close to that Boston Globe source. Suggestions for reworking it? Evrik (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
change [edit]
{{editprotected}}
The line in question was sourced and appropriate. I'd like the archived version to go back to this. Evrik (talk) 17:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Not done — Too late now, unfortunately. Content changes can only be made within 3 days of the publishing of an article (except in cases of copyright violations that are only discovered after the fact). 
