Talk:Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | 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. |
| 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. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved.
Discussions:
|
.svg){kind=small} | 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 |
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
Young-earth creationist edit
In the beginning of this article, the following is written:
"A young-earth creationist, Johnson sat on the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention between 2004 and 2012."
Not only is this unsourced, it's irrelevant to his political career as there's no following sentence that would indicate this being relevant to his political career. The next paragraph just goes into detail about how he began his political career. I think it would be best if this section was moved to the Personal life section of the article. Oogalee Boogalee (talk) 18:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
NPOV on Ukraine edit
With this edit by Wicorbottt, it is clear that some explanation is needed to indicate why the added content needs to be removed wholesale. Some of the content can be restored with adjustments, but other sources are wholly unacceptable in a biography of a living person due to reliability concerns, particularly when alternatives exist. An opinion piece, like this one, should not dictate how the article is phrased. Additionally, it's notable that no reasons are given for why Johnson has opposed the spending, despite his rationales being widely reported.
Several passages are also original research, prohibited in a BLP:
There has been considerable speculation regarding Johnson's motives
Between fall 2023 and spring 2024, Russian forces have capitalized on the weakened Ukrainian air defense caused by Johnson's blocking of American security assistance, which allowed them to increasingly damage Ukrainian energy infrastructure, with 80% of all thermal power plants destroyed in April 2024
These edits should be reverted and will be pending a day for discussion (it's a BLP, so I want to move quickly). My previous attempts to remove the POV content included the restoration of content relating to foreign leaders opposing Johnson's actions, as this seems immensely relevant to the article; my edits to this effect were also reverted by Wicorbottt. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Please note this edit, evidently in response to the BLP and POV issues. However, they do not fundamentally resolve either issue and retain POV language in wikivoice while also keeping a misleading alteration to the content on donations from a corporation that did business in Russia. Pending any support for these changes, they'll be removed. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Accusing someone who meticulously supports every statement with quotes from globally recognized publications of harboring a one-sided perspective demands a remarkable level of audacity, especially if there is reason to believe that there is a COI. I have diligently addressed all points of criticism. I am receptive to suggestions for enhancement, yet outright deleting entire paragraphs under flimsy pretexts is vandalism. Wicorbottt (talk) 11:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Wicorbottt WP:BLP is not a "flimsy pretext". —C.Fred (talk) 19:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Accusing someone who meticulously supports every statement with quotes from globally recognized publications of harboring a one-sided perspective demands a remarkable level of audacity, especially if there is reason to believe that there is a COI. I have diligently addressed all points of criticism. I am receptive to suggestions for enhancement, yet outright deleting entire paragraphs under flimsy pretexts is vandalism. Wicorbottt (talk) 11:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Article focused on Republican legislative problems/Republican-Democrat informal coalition edit
I think the issues that Republicans are having with governing in the House and their reliance on Democrats to pass key legislation may warrant its own article. I have created a draft, Draft:2023–24 House of Representatives legislative coalition, which I think talk page watchers of this page may be interested in. I would love help and suggestions, including those from people who don't believe this warrants an article at all. Thanks! Esolo5002 (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Esolo5002: This is an interesting draft, but it largely strikes me as original research. Do you have some sources that you would recommend that explicitly identify the coalition's consistent membership, its origins, and its continued activity? ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think there's enough sources specifically treating it as a topic like this to support its own article, at least not right now. In particular only one of them really uses the term "coalition." Using it for an article title like this implies there was a formal coalition government, which there isn't. --Aquillion (talk) 05:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think you made a very good job. The informal coalition between Democrats and Republicans is an interesting topic which deserves at least some mention on wikipedia, though I don't know whether it warrants an article of its own. I think a good compromise would be turning your draft article into a section of the "118th United States Congress" article. Revangarde568 (talk) 12:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ Feldman, Victor (February 26, 2024). "State of suspension: Lawmakers gripe about fast-tracked bills under Johnson". Roll Call. Retrieved April 19, 2024.
- ^ Nichols, Hans; Brufke, Juliegrace (January 17, 2024). "The House's suspended majority". Axios. Retrieved April 19, 2024.
- ^ Kane, Paul (February 1, 2024). "Neutralizing hard-liners, House Republicans using special process to pass bills". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 19, 2024.
- ^ Wise, Lindsay; DeBarros, Anthony; Hughes, Sibohan; Dapena, Kara (March 24, 2024). "Why Mike Johnson Can't Run the House Without Democrats' Help". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved April 19, 2024.
I just removed the Churchill-thing again per WP:LEAD. The sources are good for a mention in some form, still WP:LEAD fail. It also fails WP:NOTNEWS, "breaking news should not be emphasized".
IMO, the same applies for having the Ukraine 60bn thing in the WP:LEAD at all atm, very recent and if it leads to anything, time will tell. Re-wrote the Churchill-sentence: [1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Off-topic, but per coverage like [2][3], I wonder if Churchill or Chamberlain could be a decent WP-article. Or do we have a "List of political allusions" or something like that somewhere? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)