Talk:Texas Governor Perry indicted on two felony counts

Reporter's notes
[Press Release] Statement by Gov. Rick Perry 08/16/2014 8:18PM CDT [sometimes, email times don't sync up properly....go figure]
 * I received this at 3:52pm Central Time on Saturday......

"As governor, I took an oath to faithfully uphold the constitution of Texas, a pledge that I have kept every day as I've worked on behalf of Texans for the last 14 years. This same constitution clearly outlines the authority of any governor to veto items at his or her discretion. Just as I have following every legislative session during my service as governor, I exercised this authority to veto funding for an office whose leadership had lost the public's confidence by acting inappropriately and unethically." --Bddpaux (talk) 21:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * and here's one from his attorney, I think sent a bit earlier on Saturday.........

[Press Release] Statement by Mary Anne Wiley, General Counsel for Gov. Rick Perry 08/16/2014 03:36 AM CDT

"The veto in question was made in accordance with the veto authority afforded to every governor under the Texas Constitution. We will continue to aggressively defend the governor's lawful and constitutional action, and believe we will ultimately prevail." --Bddpaux (talk) 21:39, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

NPOV
Second sentence in the article is non-neutral, both for how it's said and what it says: "Most of the public clamoring, however, appears to come from politically connected individuals." --Pi zero (talk) 16:50, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know what I was reaching for there, but I didn't pull it off too well. --Bddpaux (talk) 21:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * This article doesn't mention that 10 out of 10 of the major US newspapers were critical of this indictment and that several major Democrats including David Axelrod opposed it. In fact, outside of Texas democrats, there has been very little support.--TParis (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


 * If this were an encyclopedia article that would certainly be an NPOV issue; of course, if it were an encyclopedia article it wouldn't be a snapshot in time, so one would simply change it as seemed appropriate.


 * However, a conversation about neutrality of a news article has to be based on the news notion of neutrality (according to which Wikipedia articles are routinely non-neutral, since Wikipedia's approach to neutrality is quite different). See WN:PILLARS.  It would have been of interest to cover the wider reaction to the indictment (did that reaction exist when the article was written?  when it was published?); but while it's usually good to cover a wider aspect of a story, it isn't necessarily required for neutrality (depending on how the chosen aspect is covered).  --Pi zero (talk) 11:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Title
I'd like to suggest a title that doesn't include the word "some". That's a terrible weasel word if I've ever heard one:). Simpler version: "Texas Governor Perry indicted on two felony counts". Or, if you really like the "some", perhaps this would be a good time for a semi-colon? "Texas Governor Perry indicted on two felony counts; some call for resignation"&mdash; Gopher65talk 22:51, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I ran with the simpler option, and of course after started thinking the calls for resignation should have been in there. Well, it's out the door now.  --Pi zero (talk) 00:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I concur with the title change.......it's now set to the "real" story. I fell out of love with the 'some Texans' shtick 5 seconds after I wrote it, primarily because the two people who were "calling" for his resignation are Democratic party leaders in Texas.....so that's kind of a 'cloaked' non-neutrality from the get-go!! Nevermind, that, now we can focus on stories pertaining to the fall-out (or lack thereof)! --Bddpaux (talk) 15:04, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I did think about the 'some Texans' in the lede from a neutrality perspective; but we're very clear on that distinction in the details, and it figures those calling for his resignation would likely be political opponents, so I don't think it's a problem. --Pi zero (talk) 16:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)