Jump to content

Talk:Gary Johnson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Garrett247 (talk | contribs) at 05:24, 8 May 2011 (→Semi-protect article?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Preemptive strike against claims of gay marriage support

a lot of media outlets are exaggerating this guy's libertarianism to make him more interesting. They are claiming he is pro-gay marriage. Several reputable sources such as Politico and The Hill have said as much. However, straight from the horses mouth, he only supports "gay unions" and stops short of marriage: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/08/09/washington-wire-q-a-gary-johnson/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.171.38.14 (talk) 05:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't do so at the moment, as far as I can tell. TheNgeveld 02:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Religion?

Conservapedia has him as Lutheran? andycjp (talk) 01:45, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it significant to his notability? If not, we don't need to mention it, do we? Yworo (talk) 01:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, social conservatives will want to know.andycjp (talk) 01:51, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While the US Constitution says no religious test is required of any political office, religion does play into politics. See: United_States_presidential_election,_1960#Campaign_issues.--S. Rich (talk) 02:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Of course religion is notable. In fact, religion is notable for anyone (and I say that as an arch-atheist...), provided it can be verified by a reliable source - which, of course, Conservapedia is not. However, this article used to say that he was Lutheran until a lack of references meant it was deleted (as is fitting for a WP:BLP).
My understanding - which I read in some newspaper article, but can't remember where, and so I'm not suggesting that I be cited! - is that he is a Lutheran, but not a particularly observant one. Quite a few major outlets report that he's Lutheran, or at least raised Lutheran, so that ought to go in and be referenced. If more details come up later - and, as noted, they will, because it matters a lot to some voters - that can be qualified and added to in its own separate paragraph under 'Personal life' or whatever. Bastin 10:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I would say that a person's religion is notable if noted by the person. If Johnson doesn't identify himself as a Lutheran, one has no right to declare him to be one. On the other hand, if the wall street journal (or some other reputable newspaper) were to report that he attends a lutheran church regularly, that would be worth noting in some minor way. Personally, I wouldn't add it to the article, because from what I've seen of him, he doesn't make a big deal about religion one way or the other. TheNgeveld 02:25, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Big J has a web site

Big J. Possible useful information and their logo might dress up the article a bit.Geo8rge (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The logo could only be used for fair use, which means only in the article about Big J (which doesn't currently exist, although there's no reason it couldn't), and not this article unless we got permission to do so. Bastin 17:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Added Link to the article. I think this thread is closed. TheNgeveld 21:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not link to external websites half-way through articles. It adds them as 'External links' at the bottom of the page. Bastin 00:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Footnote 15, Forbes.com profile, http://people.forbes.com/profile/governor-gary-e-johnson/3646 seems broken

Seems like broken link I could not figure out where the page moved to. There seems to be a few Gary Johnsons and even a few Gary E Johnsons.Geo8rge (talk) 14:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did someone fix this or delete this link? I can't find it. TheNgeveld 02:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 42 seems broken

Gadi Schwartz (5 November 2009). "Supporters call for former Gov. Johnson to run for president". KOB News 4. Retrieved 6 November 2009.[1]Geo8rge (talk) 14:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find this link in the article. Did someone remove it? TheNgeveld 02:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

100% praise, no criticism -- not even any ambivalence -- for a TWO-TERM GOVERNOR

No two-term governor in history has left office with not a word of criticism or even ambivalence, but only praise. This article strongly needs some sourced criticism of his time in office (and I'm not referring to the obvious point that legalizing pot is controversial -- I mean in terms of his behavior, policies, and executive acts, beyond one controversial opinion). Otherwise it's just a PR puff piece.63.17.61.86 (talk) 00:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to add said sourced criticism...that's the beauty of Wikipedia. –CWenger (^ • @) 02:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this is definitely a little poofy, not because of the vague notion that there's not criticism only praise therefore..., but because the language of the section isn't sufficiently neutral. I'll add it to my life of things to do if no one beats me to it. TheNgeveld 02:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just did a quick review of the footnotes here. Of 71 notes, 6 are refer to blogs, 7 to various organizations with strong political points of view (like salon, national review, politico, 5 straight up advocacy groups, and at least one source that looks like an opinion piece but requires a subscription to read. On my quick glance that's 19 of 71 foot notes (26%) that are probably not the best quality sources.

I just added some information about controversy -- bitter negotiations over 2000 budget leading to near shutdown of government, and 2001 controversy of Phelps-Dodge mining cleanup deal. Jytdog (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As this is a biography of a living person, statements must be verifiable by reliable sources. HCN and Gila are advocacy groups that opposed Johnson, so they aren't third parties. Meanwhile, editorials are not appropriate for anywhere near such prominence, as they deliberately eschew neutrality. If news articles reference the editorial, eg "The Santa Fe New Mexican published an editorial this week...", you can mention it, and then cite the editorial to support a specific statement from that editorial. However, if reliable sources do not mention it, it's not notable.
On the specific topic, Google '"Phelps-Dodge", "Gary Johnson"' and you'll find that the top hits are this article and a host of environmentalist groups - the two of which you cited! This suggests that you're giving it undue prominence. Bastin 20:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Moved my goofy volunteers and status thing to a new section [[Talk:Gary_E._Johnson#Rewrite_volunteers_and_progress] so that the two threads don't get totally munged. TheNgeveld 19:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC) And thanks to (User talk:Jytdog for adding controversies, etc. TheNgeveld 19:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite volunteers and progress

I think this piece definitely needs a rewrite. Maybe if everyone who cares just grabs a section and spends an hour or two on it, we can get it done. Sign up below?: TheNgeveld 19:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Headline: TheNgeveld 19:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC), I'll try to do it this weekend. COMPLETE TheNgeveld 12:35, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no longer complete, my changes were replaced with the original. In discussion. TheNgeveld 15:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Early Life: <Waiting for a volunteer>

Governor-First Term: MODIFIED - Not fully happy with it, but I think it's better. TheNgeveld 19:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Governor-Second Term: <Waiting for a volunteer>

Governor-Legacy: <Waiting for a volunteer>

Post-gubernatorial life: <Waiting for a volunteer>

2012 Campaign: (Is this premature?) –CWenger (^ • @) 23:51, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Political Positions: (Is this even appropriate content?) –CWenger (^ • @) 23:51, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Life-Sports: <Waiting for a volunteer>

Personal Life-Family: TheNgeveld 19:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC), I'll do it with the merge with his deceased former wife. COMPLETE TheNgeveld 13:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TheNgeveld 19:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will see what I can do this weekend. –CWenger (^ • @) 23:51, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Proposal

Someone (I can't tell who) add a proposal to merge the article on Dee Johnson (First Lady) with this article. Let the discussion begin. TheNgeveld 02:16, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The article on Dee Johnson is brief and lacking in any significant substance beyond that associated with working with Gov. Johnson, or being the first lady of New Mexico. I'll be happy to do the work if there is consensus. TheNgeveld 02:16, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree also. I say go for it. –CWenger (^ • @) 02:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree also. No point in having a separate article that only consists of a brief paragraph and the information is more or less already incorporated into this article.--JayJasper (talk) 04:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Stubs are fine, but if it's a stub because there's nothing to say it needs to go Jgr2 (talk) 04:23, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge it. 78.16.49.61 (talk) 17:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For everyone's info, I invited the originator of the Dee Johnson page to come here and post a comment. I'll wait a couple days for a response before doing the deed. TheNgeveld 18:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As I wrote when I split it from Dee Johnson, it's possibly not notable, which is why I didn't bother adding to it. However, there are a lot of references (in-state stuff) to work that she did as First Lady. Since the articles say things like 'NM First Lady Dee Johnson has done this' and not 'Gary Johnson has done this and Dee Johnson was standing next to him', I think that probably would make her notable. Opinions? Bastin 10:39, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
I think I agree with your original opinion, that she's not really notable. I was planning on keeping the bits about what she did as first lady in this article, and of course the redirect will go there, but it seems to me that outside of her relationship with Johnson, there will never be much to say. Contrast her with, for example, lady bird johnson, or betty ford, both of whom were notable outside of their relationships to their politician husbands. I mean, I support breast cancer research and built an addition to my house, but I'll never be notable in a wikipedia sense. See Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Additional criteria. I don't think see makes this threshold. TheNgeveld 11:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My proposed merge is now incorporated into Gary E. Johnson#Family. All that remains to be done is to redirect the dee johnson page to there and close out the merger proposal. TheNgeveld 13:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Political Positions - Does it belong here?

Folks, the political positions section makes me uncomfortable (I think I'm about to revert my own addition to it). I've posted a question to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography/Politics_and_government to see if anyone there knows of some recommendations or whatever that talks about things like this. Does anyone have an opinion? TheNgeveld 20:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a problem with it. Have you heard that it is frowned upon somewhere? –CWenger (^ • @) 22:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protect article?

As Gary E. Johnson is a potential presidential candidate, should this article be semi-protected to prevent spam?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gary_Johnson&oldid=428031129"