Talk:Alabama's 5th congressional district

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Alabama

This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles

U.S. Congress Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) place(s).

Untitled

As a Democrat and a citizen of Alabama's 5th Congressional District, I find this article extremely slanted. "Stranglehold" by the Democrats? "disinterest in social programs"? Most likely, the writer of this article either does not live in our district or is a disgruntled Republican. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psyctek1 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedic Content Unverifiable

This poorly written article's source citations are lacking.

Ethnicity, Area, Distribution, Population, Occupation, Cook PVI...

Where do these allegations come from? They're NOT facts, because they cite NO sources! No Census Bureau data, there is no link to Parker Griffith's website, there is not even one link to any alleged news article about Griffith switching political parties.

Where is even ONE validating source?

"Two major economic projects have lastingly impacted the 5th District and have indelibly dictated the politics of North Alabama for most of the 20th Century."

Really? Says who?

"As a result..."

Again, an assertion that cites no sources.

"Thus the politics of the 5th District have been dominated..."

No source citation. Are there no political writers or professors of politics in Alabama?

"However, the Democratic stranglehold..."

Weasel words - and exactly how can a "stranglehold" exist if the "...liberal economics and disinterest in social issues..." has caused the area to flourish by "slowly transforming the demographic towards technical and engineering employees," "a trend which has continued up to the present"?

The following two phrases, excerpted in context are at odds with each other, and create a schizoid impression of the area - either that, or of the person that wrote it.

"...liberal economics and disinterest in social issues - the hallmarks of the New Deal Democratic tradition in Northern Alabama." -AND- "...Alabama's growing social conservatism has gained a foothold in this district as well. As such, liberal politics have become an increasingly hard sell."

While on one hand, "disinterest in social issues" is a "hallmark" of "liberal economics," how can "growing social conservatism" exist in an atmosphere of "disinterest in social issues"?

The information as contained in this poorly written article is self-contradictory.

"As such, liberal politics have become an increasingly hard sell."

From what source did ALL the information in this phenomenally poorly written article come from?

Says who?

What source(s)?

BR549ami (talk) 16:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alabama's 5th congressional district. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100423082228/http://bioguide.congress.gov/biosearch/biosearch.asp to http://bioguide.congress.gov/biosearch/biosearch.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]