Talk:Anne Marie DeCicco-Best

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Fair use rationale for Image:Londonflag.PNG

Image:Londonflag.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Londonflag.PNG

Image:Londonflag.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Londonflag.PNG

Image:Londonflag.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LFP cover-up?

This is all conspiracy theory-related, but I find it strange that the London Free Press puts this story on the first print edition after the arrest (there's no longer a Sunday paper due to the recession) on the 2nd page and put stories like deer and wind turbines on the front page. They're either sweeping it under the rug, or very dense for not to put an attention grabbing headline like this on the front page that could get more newsstand sales. Maybe this belongs in the LFP discussion area.

Macshill (talk) 15:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well they may have been "instructed" not to make a big deal out of it, but it could also have to do with space issues, and a general lack of information aside from the most basic details (no statements from the mayor or Tim yet, and I don't think the police even officially said it was him, did they?). Was it on the front page of the C section, at least? I forget. Also, when was the last time the Free Press did anything to increase newsstand sales? Perhaps it's all part of the ongoing effort to destroy the newspaper from within. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath of election October 2010

You've got to wonder if the public in general has the wrong impression about just how much ability the mayor has in the economic health of a city (vs provincial or federal policies, laws, revenue canada, currency exchange rate, etc) and the idea that the mayor can single-handedly keep the budget in-line not needing to raise taxes without cooperation from council. I don't think I heard anyone put any of the council candidates under the microscope when it came to budgets and tax hikes.

And I don't trust Joe. Remember the phrase "the devil that you know" ? I wonder if Joe is going to achieve no tax increased by selling London Hydro. Did he ever make a public statement about that?

If Joe privatizes some aspect of city services (like garbage collection or some other outdoor service) at the first whif of a strike, like Windsor mayor Francis did, and as long as London Hydro doesn't get sold off, then I'll be happy with that, and I'll be really happy if city hall remains where it is with no multi-million-dollar rebuild or refurb, and I'll be really really happy if they kill the green-box program (utter waste of money to take my egg shells and onion peelings and truck them to an expensive facility when I can dump them in my back yard if I want). What we really need is a brown-box program -> FOR CAT LITTER!!! IF they want to divert lots of tonnage from the landfill just for the sake of diverting tonnage, there would be no better bang-for-the-buck than that, because cat litter is HEAVY.

Too bad Dicicco didn't do more to stand up to the police and stop their theivery of londoner's wallets. Our police service is far to expensive for what they do for us. If Joe has the balls to reduce the police budget, good for him. Because that's the part of the city budget that has got to be reduced if we're going to have zero percent tax increase in the next few years. Home and car break-ins, car theft isin't going down, so I say the police are doing crap for the average london home-owner.

Do you know what police are? They are armed stenographers. Ultimately what they do is take notes and fill out forms that end up on the desks of the insurance industry.

And fire-services - what a joke. Next time you see a london fire truck fly by, killing your ear drums and disturbing your sunday evening as they race to deal with a mail-box that some car backed into and turned over, just say to yourself that there goes a truck full of millionaires, because each and every one of them is a millionaire, probably living in a home just outside the city limits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.82.85 (talk) 22:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And this has what to do with the article? I think you want to send your comments to the London Free Press, because they won't have any effect here. ... discospinster _talk 22:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish National Fund

The section referring to the project DeCicco-best selected for the Jewish National fund is not relevant to the receipt of the award, and was written in such a way that was more editorial than encyclopedic. References to geopolitical history and which state a piece of land belongs to are not relevant to this biographical article. Such a discussion could be housed within a dedicated article. ~~

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anne Marie DeCicco-Best. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:13, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]