Talk:Jim Nussle

POV
Continual insertion of personal beliefs into this entry prompted the POV tag. - Jaysus Chris 07:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Jesus. Really, has Vander Plaats really become the Lt Gov man? We gotta deal with "why Republicans like Jaysuschris hate the Ten Commandments (and love right wing sluts like Karen Nussle)" Republicans. I think Jaysuschris is female, and probably, a Lesbian. (unsigned comment by FourthAve)


 * FourthAve, show us where the Abramoff info comes from, because you're wrong. Some of the people who did business with him donated money to Nussle.  Nussle returned it when he learned about the connection, the same way Harkin did.  (And Nussle actually got less money than Harkin incase you wanted to make a partisan issue out of this.). - Jaysus Chris 17:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Ethics Committee
I removed the following because I don't think it's true. These were voice votes, as I understand the situation, and Nussle was commended by the QC-Times for voting against removing standards to allow DeLay stay in leadership while under indictment. Do you have a citation?

"Last year, he voted to weaken the ethics rules to allow indicted individuals to still hold leadership roles. He also voted twice to make sure bills to strengthen the ethics rules did not come to a full House vote." - Jaysus Chris 17:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I could not find a QCT cite for it, but Dubuque Telegraph-Herald has it int the November 21, 2004 issue, age Pg. a16 - Jaysus Chris 18:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Unprotecting
I see nothing worthy of the name "discussion" here, so I'm unprotecting the article. --Tony Sidaway 02:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This RFC, and edits simlar to the commentary you removed (as well as personal attacks elsewhere) are what prompted the protection request. As you can see by the reaction at the RFC, discussion doesn't seem to be an option. - Jaysus Chris 03:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Bono editing this article
I thought it was cool... until I realised that he was violating our NPOV policy. See this article. A polite message to Bono might not go astray? - Ta bu shi da yu 00:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like the edit came from an XO Communications customer in Reston, VA. Lobbyist?  Probably the best 3 minutes they've spent as far as news coverage is concerned. - Jaysus Chris 01:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I added a bit to the main article about Bono's group having edited this article, and a link to the story in the Des Moines, Iowa Register concerning these edits. And if there's a case for not making POV edits to an article, here it is, because users never know who actually is reading these articles. JesseG 22:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Is this notable? Everytime someone makes a POV edit to an article, are we going to document it in the article?  Doesn't this accomplish the goal of astroturfing, only in a backdoor manner? Even if this deserves a mention, it surely does not warrant its own section. I don't think it belongs at all, but maybe this compromise will do?  I also removed some language suspiciously similar to that used by user:FourthAve- Jaysus Chris 05:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, I put a few sentences back in about this to the background section. Normally I wouldn't bother documenting anything when it comes to a POV edit in the main article.  But as this made it into the Register, I thought it did deserve some sort of mention in the article.  I think that it belongs just as a way to make people aware that there are operatives on both sides of the political aisle who would attempt to exploit Wikipedia for their benefit or their own side's benefit.
 * JesseG 23:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Recent Activity
I had asked for the Nussle article to be placed in semi-protect status because of vandalism to the article that has taken place over the past day. People that know me know that I am no Republican, but Wikipedia is not the place, and my interest in fixing this is to ensure that the article holds to a higher standard and remains as netural as possible.

During all the activity, the paragraphs about the Bono connection got taken out, so I went ahead and put them back in. I did that for the same reason that I gave above, because I think it deserves some sort of mention, if for no other reason than to make people aware that there are people who'll change articles for political benefit despite the NPOV policies. JesseG 04:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

WPP
Was referred to as "foreign owned" - it's listed on Nasdaq and the UK stock exchange. Foreign is also a word whose meaning depends on the reader. Rich Farmbrough 22:46 10  May 2006 (UTC). 22:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC) I've changed it to "international".

Spelling error
Spelling:bacame==>became You can help! Aclayartist (talk) 16:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:BIOGRAPHY reassessment
Content looks OK, but only a single citation means that this article is not up to B-Class standards. I have downgraded it to C-Class accordingly. PC78 (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Nussle. 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:
 * Added tag to http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20060324%2FNEWS09%2F603240358%2F1001%2FNEWS
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110202222918/http://thenusslegroup.com/ to http://thenusslegroup.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

2006 gubernatorial bid
I don't believe he was on the ballot in 2006 for his congressional seat, but it says that he "also lost it" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:140:8201:1476:ECEA:10F5:DB08:8712 (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

RfC on paragraph about an edit
There is currently a paragraph in the Political career section recounting a statement placed on the page in 2006 by a lobbying group to further their agenda. I don't feel like this belongs on the page, but I would appreciate others' thoughts. Quorum816 (talk) 16:53, 15 July 2020 (UTC)