Talk:Stephen Lynch (politician)

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good articleStephen Lynch (politician) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 18, 2011Good article nomineeListed
June 15, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article

Untitled

You guys are ridiculous!

"he takes a strong anti-abortion stand on issues, most notably on abortion"

?????

What's Congressman Lynch's stance on the Department of Redundancy Department?

huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.159.88 (talk) 03:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Health Care Rally/Debate

I have noticed this article is getting increased attention since it became clear that Rep. Lynch has been on the fence regarding a public healthcare option and may run in the special election. DO NOT edit this article to reflect that policy point without AT LEAST citing it. If the remarks appear inflammatory as opposed to simply informative of the congressman's positions, I will Undo them immediately. Alex (talk) 13:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Steve King petition

I've started a discussion regarding the notability of a series of similar edits, including one on this article, over on my talk page: User talk:Arbor832466#Steve King petition. Please feel free to weigh in! Arbor832466 (talk) 02:13, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Stephen Lynch (politician)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 13:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: none found Jezhotwells (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Prose good, I note one statement "As of 2010[update], Stephen and Margaret Lynch live in South Boston with their daughter Victoria Bailey Lynch (born c.2000) and their niece Crystal Shaughnessy (born c.1995)." that has triggered the category Category:All articles containing potentially dated statements, that may need addressing in future
    Yeah, as soon as an article from 2011 mentions the family situation, I'll advance the date. —Designate (talk) 01:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK
    Complies sufficiently with MoS
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    References check out, the first EL[1] is used as ref#2 so should be removed from ELs as per WP:EL
    Technically the ref is one page from the site, whereas the EL is the whole site. —Designate (talk) 01:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Not sure why we need File:Joemoakley.jpg , I know Lynch succeeded him, but does the picture add anything to the article?
    I think it's OK to have tangential images if they don't overwhelm the article. It's your call I guess. —Designate (talk) 01:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    One query. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, I am happy to pass this as GA. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 01:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

recent edits

i don't really want to get involved in these reversions, but i think that the original version looks better. that also doesn't mean the content of the proposed version isn't alright as well- it can just be integrated. just my two cents.. minorCOLOSSAL (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Stephen F. Lynch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stephen F. Lynch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:13, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-life

I think the line about Rep. Lynch being pro-life is out-of-date. He officially flip-flopped on the issue when he ran for Senate in 2013, announcing that abortion is a constitutionally protected right and Roe v. Wade ought to be upheld (see https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/02/05/lynch-long-pro-life-antiabortion-legislator-says-supports-roe-wade/TvoPjNf90snncEUckQXBRK/story.html ). Since then, he has voted to keep late-term abortion legal. He was rated 100% by NARAL and 0% by the National Right to Life Committee. 2607:FEA8:C3A0:655:40BD:6B8A:E0E9:E2E4 (talk) 03:09, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Stephen_Lynch_(politician)"