Talk:Phil Scott

This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government 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. United States: Governors / Vermont Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. governors (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Vermont (assessed as Low-importance).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[Factions in the Republican Party (United States)#Liberals|liberal Republican]] The anchor (#Liberals) has been deleted. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

I don't remember how to fix that, and don't have the time, but there you go.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS388US388&q=%22philip+scott%22+site:vt.us&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.197.168.194 (talk) 19:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Phil Scott.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Phil Scott.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- talk) 10:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply ]

My recent edit to this page was tagged as possible BLP for vandalism. All I did was add policy positions on economic development, health care, sex/violent crime, and education issues. There was no BLP or vandalism. All citations were credible, as most of them were directly from the Vermont Legislature's website. Can someone remove this tag so that my edits can be publicly reflected on the article page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckduck764 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chuckduck764 The tag was placed by an automatic process known as an edit filter, which picks up on certain key words and phrases which may indicate a problematic edit. I don't think the tag on the edit summary can be removed, but experienced editors will know that these edit filters sometimes produce "false positives" and flag up edits that are in fact valid, as yours appears to be. You may if you wish report the case here: Noyster (talk), 00:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Noyster Chuckduck764 (talk) 02:14, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can we switch the infobox image to this? It’s clearer, better lit, it’s more recent, and it feels much more like a formal portrait than the current image, which looks pretty bad by comparison. Thoughts? The Image Editor (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I like this one you suggested better than the one that is on the page. Jessamyn (talk) 21:08, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm in favor of changing to the proposed image. Sundayclose (talk) 00:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. feminist (talk) | free Hong Kong 13:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]