Talk:Russ Feingold

Russ Feingold was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 17, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

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.

This page is about a 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. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

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:

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
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: State Legislatures / Government Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. State Legislatures (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

U.S. Congress High‑importance

	United States portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) person(s).

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

nothing short of praising a controversial politician

This article is nothing short of praising a controversial politician. The links are absured....all of them praise the man. The only article that does says anything of particular against the man, actually gives him a good image at the end of the article. I'm going to put in some links that aren't so glowing of the man. Fair is Fair.... Ronsin1976 23:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone erased my link and put another obvious PR0-Feingold on there it is going away. Fair is Fsit...Wikpedia is supposed to have fair standards not heavy biases. Ronsin1976 20:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explain how this article is overly biased. The article is basically a summery of his policy positions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.93.107 (talk) 06:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know a whole lot about this politician, but it does seem like the positions listed are the ones that supporters might like posted up here. I'm going to look more into it, it does seem biased from both the links and what of his record is posted on here. I wouldn't go so far as to say that this article is meant to praise a controversial politician though. Perhaps we should look into this more? Abdishtar (talk) 17:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "The only article that does says anything of particular against the man, actually gives him a good image at the end of the article. I'm going to put in some links that aren't so glowing of the man. Fair is Fair...." there being true good things on the page does not justify putting an equal amount of false bad things on the page. in other words, fair is not unfair, and unfair is not fair. and it is not "all is fair in love and war." -- this is neither love nor war. when it comes to information, one and only one thing is fair: the truth. which -- believe it or not -- often is one-sided. the fair standard for wikipedia is: due weight and verifiability. that does NOT mean treating both sides as if they were equal, esp. when they, in fact, are not. it means following wikipedia standards and policies and applying them equally and without prejudice to each piece of information, regardless of what the end result turns out to be. Kevin Baas^talk 18:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually to be honest, there's a difference between having 10 pro sources and none that are critical. Most politicans do at least have a few critical vertifiable sources, Feinstein did also. Ronsin1976 19:42, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ronsin1976, if you insist on Commenting, please at least try to get the man's name right. It's not Feinstein. It's Feingold. Younggoldchip (talk) 21:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ideology

Feingold is widely seen as liberal. I've added the Poole-Rosenthal rating which has him the #1 liberal in the Senate for several years running. As noted here, "... voteview.com, created by a University of California at San Diego professor named Keith Poole.... uses an extremely rigorous methodology for ordering Senators from most liberal to most conservative". See also here where it is noted that "The system used in that study, developed by Poole and political science professor Howard Rosenthal, has become widely used and cited among political scientists (see here for a list of academic studies that have utilized the Poole-Rosenthal system to evaluate legislative votes in both the U.S. and other countries). The Poole-Rosenthal ratings have several advantages... most notably that the former use every non-unanimous vote cast by every legislator to determine his or her relative ideology..."Bdell555 (talk) 23:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poole-Rosenthal is considered flawed by many, who feel that it is based on an a priori assumption of mono-dimensional politics. Libertarians, fiscally-conservative social democrats, Christian socialists, fundamentalist pacifists: such persons do not exist in the universe this Procrustean bed "measures"! --Orange Mike | Talk 23:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OrangeMike makes a good point. "Feingold is widely seen as a liberal" is not reason to tag him as such in his article. You're throwing around flawed thinking fueled by your own personal opinion. This is not what Wikipedia is for.

This "Ideological Rankings" section is outrageously POV. It needs to be taken out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.226.85 (talk) 05:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

"ruled out" :
- [[Milwaukee Journal Sentinel]]. [http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=529983 Feingold rules out 2008 run for president]. [[November 11]], [[2006]].
- [[Milwaukee Journal Sentinel]]. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=529983 Feingold rules out 2008 run for president. [[November 11]], [[2006]].

DumZiBoT (talk) 01:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I say keep in the Ideological

The majority of this article is a puff-piece designed to promote a sitting Senator, with obvious aspirations for the Presidency. If such things as his "garage door" are allowed, then the pro-and-con rankings by both Liberal and Conservative groups should stay. No politician should be allowed to pose on both sides of an idelogical scale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfoofnik (talk • contribs) 03:43, 22 February 2009

I don't know how to properly format the correction, but the link concerning promises he made in his 1992 campaign is broken. It can be found on the way-back-machine, here. http://web.archive.org/web/20080507201907/http://www.russfeingold.org/promiseskept.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.146.235.67 (talk) 04:12, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not a former Senator

First of all, as of my writing this Feingold is only the projected loser of the Wisconsin Senate race, not the official loser. He has not "been defeated," he has "been projected to have lost."

Furthermore, he is NOT A FORMER SENATOR! He is still in office until at least January, including a lame-duck session of Congress, so he is still very much a current U.S. Senator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.237.228.220 (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's certainly still a Senator. I'll correct the lede to state that Senator Feingold is the projected loser. His team are pointing out that there are 500,000 votes from the Milwaukee and Dane counties to count, and as of writing this 57% of the precincts are in, so it's not completely over. But barring a recount, which could happen, Senator Feingold has two months left in the Senate, for this election cycle at least. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 03:32, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not succeeded yet

Russ Feingold will not be officially succeeded until January 3, 2011. Therefore, any edits reflecting his departure from the Senate should not be made until then. --Gb supernova (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Russ Feingold. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080225185334/http://www.madison.com:80/tct/news/273831 to http://www.madison.com/tct/news/273831

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Russ Feingold. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=/madison.com/html/archive_files/wsj/1996/08/27/9608270138.php
Corrected formatting/usage for http://eyecandypromo.com/GM/Elvistest.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=83
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pbs.org/newshour/shields&gigot/october98/sg_10-30.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://feingold.senate.gov/news/biography.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Russ Feingold. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=%2Fmadison.com%2Fhtml%2Farchive_files%2Fwsj%2F1996%2F08%2F27%2F9608270138.php
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n21_v44/ai_12936559
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pbs.org/newshour/shields%26gigot/october98/sg_10-30.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140322013918/http://www.jewishchronicle.org/article.php?article_id=12024 to http://www.jewishchronicle.org/article.php?article_id=12024
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080730201058/http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/electionInfo/index.html to http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/electionInfo/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:35, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Critical issues not representative.

Numerous sourcing for criticisms that basically center around feather bedding;

Did Russ Feingold form 'his own political group to pay himself and his staff millions'?

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/nov/03/republican-party-wisconsin/did-russ-feingold-form-his-own-political-group-pay/

As stated in another talk section, a balance to the promo BLP is may be in order.

--Wikipietime (talk) 23:04, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Russ Feingold. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:09, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]