![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Daniel Hoan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:45, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
According to the article, every government spending increase of Mayor Hoan was a good thing (and there is no mention that a lot of this spending was funded by the State Income Tax), and every city takeover of a utility (or anything else) was a success. The Mayor is remembered as "one of the best", "experts say...." and so on. Is the article meant to be a parody? I know that Wikipedia is a pro big government site - but there is such a thing as going off the top. You might as well say that Mayor Hoan was saint, and that whenever he went to the toilet people flocked to enjoy the fragrance. Have a sense of proportion - you can praise someone whose big government politics is similar to your own, without going over the top and producing an article that reads as if it was written as a parody of the "Progressive" position. 2A02:C7E:1CA8:CE00:5C27:E3D0:DFF0:2514 ( talk) 15:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)