Talk:Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Congress High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) thing(s).

hill committee[edit]

All four hill committee articles had redundant and partly incorrect or misleading information. I have created a hill committee article and removed the material not specific to the individual committees from their respective articles. It's actually arguable whether we need separate articles at all, given how similar all four are in structure and function. RadicalSubversiv E

My removal[edit]

This is an encyclopedia article, not a current-events summary. In the scheme of the DSCC and its entire history, the two staffers being suspended seem fairly minor (they should be mentioned at Michael Steele, however). As such, I've removed this--there's no way we'd include a similar incident if it had occurred in 1966. Best wishes, Meelar (talk) 13:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This received national media coverage (i.e. significant, verifiable, etc.) That's the standard for inclusion of information on active politicians and political issues. Generally speaking, much smaller scandals have been getting far more attention in the Wikipedia than this one. patsw 14:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage, yes, but where? The incident is significant enough to be mentioned in Steele's article because it was significant in the news coverage concerning him. The DSCC, by contrast, has a long history of political work that predates Steele, and will be around long after Steele is retired. In the context of the DSCC, with all that could be written about it over the course of decades, this incident doesn't rate a mention. JamesMLane t c 06:26, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Dscclogo.png[edit]

Image:Dscclogo.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 Wikipedia articles 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 03:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TIME TO UPDATE![edit]

The section on 2015-2016 needs to be updated to reflect 2016 election results - and that the 2016 election is now in the past! C. Cerf (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What do they do?[edit]

I came to this page hoping to find out what DSCC does. Does it give money to the campaigns of individual candidates, or does it run ads and do other campaigning itself, or both? I don't see an answer. Seems like basic information that should be in the first paragraph. JWWalker (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2018 (UTC) Also: what are the limits on contributing to the DSCC? What are the limits on DSCC contributions to campaigns? How much did the DSCC give to campaigns in the most recent cycle? How much were their other expenditures? And finally, how does the DSCC differ from the Senate Majority PAC, which is mostly run by the same people? C. Cerf (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Buying oil from Russia???[edit]

This has to stop!!! 72.195.197.113 (talk) 01:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Buying oil from Russia????[edit]

The Senate has to sanction Russian oil!!!

The USA can up their production in our country.

Get your act together. 72.195.197.113 (talk) 01:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]