Talk:Census 2010

A couple of issues

• The section on "design changes" to the 2010 census is very informative, but doesn't shed much light on how they might be used as a "loophole for manipulation." They seem, in the description provided, to enhance the accuracy of the census, rather than to manipulate it. The top paragraph states (rather un-encylopedically) that "So many changes could easily open a new loophole for manipulation, and it's important that we analyze these changes carefully." If the following analysis doesn't prove this statement, it doesn't belong. As it stands, it is unsubstantiated opinion.
• "There are several ways in which Obama might circumvent the requirement of Actual Enumeration, in order to gerrymander districts to favor his reelection." This statement is a bald speculation, and assumes the worst possible motives in an unsupportable fashion. Furthermore, it does not make sense with the rest of the section, which consists of a blog quotation. It does not belong.

Both of these examples are blatant insertion of opinion into the article, which is not allowed under CC #5: "Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry." I understand the intention of this article, to highlight potential problems with the changes in the Obama administration's handling of the census. This is a fair and needed addition to a Conservative encyclopedia, but it can be done without it turning into a blog entry.

God bless. JDWpianist 17:43, 22 May 2009 (EDT)