Talk:Kristi Noem

Family farm

It's odd that Noem and her defenders like to talk up her "farm", but there is little to nothing said about it here except that her father died there. It was apparently a 9,700-acre ranch that Noem inherited. She received more than $4 million in government subsidies for the ranch before she "cashed out" in 2017 so it isn't even clear that the claims about her running a "farm" where she killed her dog and goat are even true. ("Between 1995 and 2016, her family-owned Racota Valley Ranch in Hazel, S.D. cashed $3,704,415 million in government farm subsidies. In 2012 alone, they accepted $232,707 in subsidies.") I wonder what South Dakota taxpayers would think about the millions Noem received in a state where the minimum wage is $11.20 per hour. For what it is worth, it appears that Noem is on record as being against subsidies for anyone other than herself. Once again, the same story plays out: socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor. Viriditas (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Multiple legal experts have poked holes in Noem's story about her farm and the IRS.[1] Viriditas (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

These statements, in order for them to be considered for inclusion in this article, must be backed by specific Reliable sources. Also, Moral opinions may not be helpful for factual discussion. Wikipedia is for neutral factual information (WP:NPOV), as much as possible. RogerYg (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I would argue that the recent dog killing incident deserves its own section

This incident seems much more relevant than others that have a dedicated section. Including Conflict of interest action to professionally benefit daughter, Fireworks at Mount Rushmore lawsuit, Governor's mansion spending, "Meth. We're on It" campaign and others. While all sections have seemingly shaped her stances and gave insight to character, this appears to be defining a part of her career and possibly losing the chance at a VP nod. Obviously if it doesn't revisions can be made then but for now it seems to be very much front facing in all media. 2604:2D80:5907:C400:F9F1:AFC5:3BDC:B240 (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with the significant and widespread media coverage of the "Dog Killing incident", it can no longer be just a detail in the Personal life section, and deserves a new section, or sub-section along with other related issues from her book, such as goat killings. Given the significant WP:RS sources, this is the most reported story on Kristi Noem, and hence needs a brief mention in the lead. RogerYg (talk) 05:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

As per the discussion, a sub-section within "Personal life" section, as Dog shooting incident has been added. Since, it broadly falls more under Personal life, as compared to other major sections sections on Career. RogerYg (talk) 06:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, this incident has caused the third highest page views of this article during its lifetime. [2] starship.paint (RUN) 08:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Brief mention in Lead, including the overall context of Farm life, along with her autobiographies:

Living in rural South Dakota, Noem is also a farmer and a rancher.[2] Noem published first autobiography, Not My First Rodeo: Lessons from the Heartland in 2022.[3] Later in 2024, in her second autobiography, No Going Back, Noem mentioned about an incident involving shooting her untrainable dog [2][4] and defended it as a "tough decision".[4][5]

Please discuss here for any relevant updates to the brief lead mention. RogerYg (talk)

Changed to Noem reportedly discussed killing her "untrainable" 14-month old dog that she "hated", while publicly defending her action as being that of a "responsible owner". (1) "reportedly" because the book chapter has not been publicly released yet, this is the Guardian's reporting. (2) changed "tough decision" because it was vague, perhaps "responsible owner" is more descriptive. (3) provided age of dog and feeling towards dog. starship.paint (RUN) 08:39, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

"age" of dog and "feeling towards dog" are probably details not neccecary in the lead. They are mentioned in the body.. "Hated" is a strong word for lead.

We need to make lead more neutral to avoid frequent edits & reverts in the lead by different editors RogerYg (talk) 08:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

@RogerYg: - I respect your input and have changed the lede accordingly to remove "hated", I still feel that the age of the dog is needed to clarify that this is not an old dog that needed euthanasia from old age. Noem reportedly discussed killing her aggressive and "untrainable" 14-month old dog, while publicly defending her action as being that of a "responsible owner". starship.paint (RUN) 08:53, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay, looks fine for now. RogerYg (talk) 08:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I think we need to mention briefly about the criticism, when including her defence Updated with neutral language:

Responding to the criticism, Noem defended it as a tough decision of a "responsible owner". RogerYg (talk) 09:17, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

The initial coverage was based only on the Guardian's report of her disclosure. It may be heavily covered, but all of the sources that detail the story are based on the Guardian report. The book is out on Tuesday and we can edit accordingly; its publication will generate more coverage.JSFarman (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, okay with above. starship.paint (RUN) 01:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

As per WP:RS sources, "Untrainable" is Noem's opinion and not factual enough to include in lead.

Also, as it was currently stated in the lead, it was not clear whether it was Noem's opinion or fact. Therefore, it had be deleted, or re-stated in different language RogerYg (talk) 06:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Restated to clarify that these are Noem's opinions: "responsible owner" and "untrainable." Noem recounted an incident in which she shot and killed her young dog that seemed "untrainable".[4][5] Responding to widespread criticism, Noem argued that she was a "responsible owner" who made a tough decision.[6][5] RogerYg (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

OK. starship.paint (RUN) 06:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Monthly views - April 2024 is the month with the most views dating to the start of counting in 2015. Meanwhile May 2024 is already the third or fourth highest viewed month, and will probably become the most viewed month in less than a week. No Going Back certainly seems like the biggest thing of her political career so far. starship.paint (RUN) 14:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Suggested Edit: Add that she shot her goat twice in the gravel pit

In the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristi_Noem#No_Going_Back it states that Governor Noem decided to kill her goat. However according to the sources listed she then took her goat to the gravel pit where she shot her dog and shot her goat twice as well. Seems prurient to add that she followed through on her decision. 2601:2C3:800:B080:94FC:772:A71D:F5B8 (talk) 19:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

OK. Someone else already added two shots, I added the location. starship.paint (RUN) 06:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. 2601:2C3:800:B080:B08D:2B9F:6F81:A0D9 (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Why is this in the article? It adds zero value, even the banner above the excerpt asks to trim it down due to it being only appreciated by a small very specific audience. Just because she said it in her book does not give it notability to be on this page. Please remove this entire entry. MaximusEditor (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Create a "Controversy" section?

Given the prominence of the dog and goat shooting incident on her public image, as well as false claims about meeting North Korea's leader, etc., do you think it would be advisable to move these details from "Personal Life" to a new section that can broadly encapsulate these controversies? There has already been some support to give the episode with the dog its own section. ChthonicSweetie (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

We should not create a WP:CONTROVERSYSECTION. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this is helpful to me as a new editor. Would "Public Image" be more admissible, as suggested in the link you included? ChthonicSweetie (talk) 01:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I did not realize how new you are here. Welcome. Glad I didn't WP:BITE you. A "public image" section could work, but would have to put the focus on how she is perceived for those things. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Military service

civil Air patrol does not qualify as military service. This needs to be removed as it is borderline stolen valor. Civil Air Patrol is not authorized to wear the GWOT medal because they are not part of the military. 2601:18C:8600:DA10:9C79:309A:395F:6D96 (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree this should be removed. The language is provided without citation, and I can't find any source to support this. At best, it appears that the CAP makes legislators honorary members. So you might have at best an honorary member of a civilian auxiliary group. This should be deleted. Athoughtforyou (talk) 12:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)