Talk:Scott Walker (politician)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scott Walker (politician) 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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3: 60 days

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 Mid-importance).

United States: Colorado / Iowa Mid‑importance

	United States portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Colorado portal This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to improve, create, and update Wikipedia articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the New section tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!
	Iowa portal This article is supported by WikiProject Iowa (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wisconsin High‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Scott Walker 2016 presidential campaign was copied or moved into Scott Walker (politician) with this edit on 22 January 2020. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Archives

Index

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Official social media links[edit]

Friendly reminder that according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links and more specifically, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided social media links are avoided UNLESS/EXCEPT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#Official_links. The Twitter and Instagram accounts referenced in External Links are Official and therefore are allowable.

But only if there is no regular website; the subject only gets one link to a site they control, and that's normally their official website. We don't use a Twitter, Facebook or Instagram account unless that's all there is.

New PoV Tags[edit]

PoV and factual accuracy tags have been put on this page, but this article does not appear to be particularly slanted one way or the other nor is it sourced poorly. The summary of his tenure describes his governorship as "polarizing" and the factual coverage in the sources backs that up. Sourcing wise, this article has a strong mix of reliable sources, Milwaukee and Wisconsin media is represented along with all the best national sources like the NYT, WSJ, and AP. I would like to start a discussion (Ethnic laundry was the one who placed the tags) before removing the tags, so that any concerns can be addressed. SWL36 (talk) 18:10, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic laundry, you tagged the Scott Walker article for problems with POV and factual accuracy. Please visit the article talk page and explain the reasons for the tags. Thank you. SunCrow (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SWL36 and SunCrow: I placed the POV tag after reading the article. There appears to be consistent use of phrasing and modifiers that can intentionally affect the reader's opinion. A few excerpted examples (bold below) from early in the article:

* "the selective Boys Nation..."; I suppose that's true, but Starbucks (for example) could equally be called selective in its employment practices.
* "a record number of students voted..."; I could find no documented support for the use of this word.
* "a strong supporter of a bill to require voters to show photo ID..."; again Google failed to find any reason to use the adjective (also the associated link is dead).
* "he took the lead in a truth-in-sentencing bill..."; According to the referenced article, Walker himself credits the American Legislative Exchange Council; he is described as merely advocating for the bill.

I also note the article contains frequent irrelevancies (eg: the "19-point resume"), which confuse and obfuscate.

Please understand - I don't feel the article favors a single viewpoint, but rather it has the "cobbled-together" appearance of being constructed from opposing articles - each of which has a definite pro- or anti- viewpoint. The problems (a small sample of which I address) seem to be left-overs, but they do detract (and I believe significantly) from the utility of this article. Indeed, reviewing some of these "weasel-ish" words led me to add the factual-accuracy tag. Minor stuff, but lack of support is a lack of support... Maybe there are "mini-tags" for this type of issue?

I presently don't feel I can treat the subject with justice. So I'll not do the job. I hope somebody will - Walker is truly a polarizing figure and his efforts have current significance.

I apologize for the delay in my response - I needed time to address a family emergency. I appreciate your patience.

Ethnic laundry (talk) 20:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanation, Ethnic laundry. I hope that your family emergency has been resolved. I have removed a few POV-sounding words from the article, which I hope has solved the problem; please review and see what you think. Also, since you did not identify any factual inaccuracies, I took the liberty of removing the tag that indicated problems with accuracy; if you do see any specific inaccuracies, please point them out and/or correct them. Finally, please remember to include an explanation next time you tag a page. Thanks. Regards, SunCrow (talk) 23:52, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My son is okay for now, and the emergent component has shifted from medical to financial (how to pay for surgery)... Thnaks for good wishes SunCrow. I'll review the article Ethnic laundry (talk) 16:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SunCrow - revisiting the specific inaccuracy issue:

On 7/14/2015 a non-logged-in user (74.127.175.164) changed the lead text "the only governor in the U.S. to date to win a gubernatorial recall election" (referencing Eyder Peralta's 6/5/2012 NPR article) to the unsupported and false statement "the first American governor to survive a recall effort." During the fifty years 1962-2012 - in the state of California alone - there have been unsuccessful efforts to recall Governors Ronald Reagan, Jerry Brown, George Dukmejian, Pete Wilson, and even Arnold Schwarzenegger (though the last appears not to be documented in Wikipedia).

As you seem interested in the article, I'm asking you to review and correct the problem; I'll look back in a week (5/17) and change it if you haven't. Thanks! Ethnic laundry (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Ethnic laundry. Thanks for the heads up. SunCrow (talk) 16:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Flint[edit]

You should add somthing about the Flint lead poisoning.

Also https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/435390-wisconsin-dem-governor-removes-82-scott-walker-appointees-added-during — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arydberg (talk • contribs) 21:38, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Scott Walker 2016 presidential campaign[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merged into Scott Walker (politician) as proposed. Surachit (talk) 05:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Only a few paragraphs of info that aren't in Scott Walker's main article. p b p 17:29, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There's not much actual substance to that article that couldn't be on the main Scott Walker article. His campaign wasn't that prominent as he dropped out early and didn't receive a very high vote share. Not to say that it's completely insignificant, because it definitely is relevant to this topic, but not significant enough to warrant its own article. TNats ₃ 00:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A blip in a career that does not warrant its own article. Many Wikipedians are far too eager to create spin-off articles based on what's in the day's news, giving no heed whatsoever to WP:RECENTISM or perspective. WP:NPOV does not mean everything must be covered (WP:NOTEVERYTHING), merely that things should be covered in proportion to their prominence. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:56, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support His campaign for President wasn't significant enough per WP:GNG to have its own separate article. ––Redditaddict69 ^(talk) ^(contribs) 23:10, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.