Talk:Commerce Department trade mission controversy
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
NPOV
editWhat's the rationale for the NPOV tag? --Sigma 7 04:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- This article has a few problems, although I'm not sure the NPOV tag is the right one. First, "commercegate" "ron brown" gets a meager 16 googlehits; did anyone besides Judical Watch use the term "Commercegate"? Second, the sourcing is erratic; it isn't clear which of the unfootnoted sentences the bottom three references apply to, and which if any sentences are truly unsourced. Third, it isn't clear what the three charges that Nolanda Hill pleaded guilty to, had to do with the selling of seats charge; or was this a completely unrelated personal transgression that just happened to be discovered once investigations began? Fourth, the article isn't wikilinked to from anywhere, meaning that work on it will be unrewarded since few people will see it. Wasted Time R 11:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- 1) Thank you for the feedback, all good points, this page is fairly new and all your pionts will be fixed in the near future. Google reports 537 hits for Commercegate and 548 for commerce gate "commerce gate".
Telecine Guy 20:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Umm, yes, but as I'm sure you can see, almost all of those hits are for companies or products called Commercegate or for adult sites. Wasted Time R 20:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
What to call it "Clinton Commerce scandal" has more hits? Telecine Guy 00:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- No, the connections to either Clinton are very tangential. I guess leave it where it is for now pending a better idea. But what is the connection between this article and 1996 United States campaign finance controversy? In particular, the "Department of Commerce" section there? Seems to be discussing the same thing. Wasted Time R 11:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Requested move 29 December 2016
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved. No objections, and a cursory search reveals that while some websites do use the term, most repuable news sources discuss it without the "gate" suffix. — Amakuru (talk) 16:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Commercegate → Commerce Department trade mission controversy – "Commercegate" is rarely used for this matter. Google search of this term shows mostly online payment systems. There is no one name that sources use for this controversy, but the one proposed seems adequate to the task. 2600:1001:B113:7C0A:9CA9:EA2A:AF77:662 (talk) 15:31, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.