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 sourcedmust 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.
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 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 within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
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.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges 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.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges articles
I rolled back what I assume was a good faith edit by Iamreallygoodatcheckers that deleted 4.7 Tapping. This incident definitely was controversial, as it was covered by all the national television networks. Perhaps more could be said about the incident, which I would welcome. But I recommend against deleting the section entirely. Art SmartChart/Heart 14:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The section on COVID is mis-leading. Senator Gohmert put on his mask when entring the building. Democrat who was quoted later had to clarify what the said, as it was being used to imply Senator Gohmenrt was not wearing a mask. Outside he wasn't, but upon entering he did. While in the panel he was wearing a mask. Either remove the section on COVID or provide complete details to this section. 205.254.147.8 (talk) 17:51, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Move COVID-19 Section to be Under Controversies?[edit]
Asking a question: Shouldn't the COVID-19 section be moved from Tenure to Controversies? Seems like it belongs in the latter location. Just my option. Thanks. Art SmartChart/Heart 12:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2020[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The page uses both spellings in different places, I'm just wondering if there's a reason for this or if it's a mistake. Khronicle I (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
His congressional office says "Louie" [1] As far as current usage goes, that should settle it. The usages of Louis in this article are: his full name, his birth name, and his father's name. Those all seem appropriate. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:54, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Khronicle I -- Well, the article title uses Louie, and he is named "Louis" in the lead. (His father is mentioned as Louis.) The infobox uses both versions, whcih looks weird. The article (correctly) calls him "Gohmert" after the first naming, not Louis or Louie. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 18:06, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Magnolia677: In regards to your revert, I see no reason why The Tyler Loop wouldn't be considered reliable or significant, especially when the writer of the article, Eric Neugeboren, is also one of the reputable Texas Tribune. [2] Even then, I was still careful and chose to attribute the text due to the relative controversial nature of the text and Gohmert being a BLP. The other quote is a political scientist at a university. This is a reliable source that provides a good overall summary of a significant aspect of Gohmert's reputation. Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 19:37, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An editor could cherrypick from thousands of non-notable bloggers and podcasters to support any imaginable opinion. I could probably find a non-notable blogger who thinks Gohert should win the Nobel Prize. Just because someone says something on the internet, does not mean it is encyclopedic. Please see WP:VNOT, and remember this is a BLP. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, but this is not an opinion of a non-notable blogger or podcaster. It's an article by the Texas Tribune that was republished by the Tyler Loop. [3][4] It's not an opinion at all. Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 19:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then why would you say "The Tyler Loop" says something, when all they did was republish this article? They didn't say anything you added on their behalf. Just cite the newspaper. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Me attributing it to Tyler Loop was a honest mistake. I didn’t realize at the time it was written by the Texas Tribune Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 23:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Magnolia677: I don't want step on any toes here and be accused of edit warring or something. Are you ok with me adding the content back with it sourced to the Texas Tribune? I was also thinking of removing the quote by the political scientist since it's kinda redundant to the other information. Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 20:37, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sure. It just seemed like a cherrypicked negative when it came from non-notables. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:49, 29 July 2020 (UTC)