Talk:Rob Andrews

Date of first election.
This page says "In 1990, after 15-year incumbent James Florio resigned to take office as Governor of New Jersey, Andrews won a special election to succeed him. He won a full term later that year." But this source says Andrews won the special and general election the same day. Does anyone have a source saying they were different days? Simon12 06:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge
Merge Uncontroversial todying up so I'd suggest just going for it (if it is felt that this should be under the name of the other entry then a move can be sorted out in the future but the two entries need merging as a priority)> (Emperor 17:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC))

Camille Andrews Congressional Candidacy
I have reverted an anonymous user's deletion of information concerning Camille Andrews campaign to succeed her husband in Congress. Under Wikipedia policies and guidelines, it is acceptable to briefly mention information concerning the relatives of biography article subjects when the relative may not be notable enough to qualify for an article in their own right. If someone wants to create an article on Camille Andrews and move the information there, that would be fine with me, or the information should be left in this article. --TommyBoy (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The information belongs here, in any case. To anyone versed in politics, the possibility that Rob Andrews himself will be the House candidate, despite his announcement to the contrary, strongly suggests itself. It would be beyond the proper scope of the article to get into that speculation, except perhaps by quoting newspaper columns that engage in the speculation. But presenting the data that puts the senate campaign in context is within the proper scope of the article.


 * One advantage of Camille Andrews' running for the seat is that even if Rob doesn't take over the candidacy, his donor base has to wonder if he will, whereby he would remain in a powerful position, making it more advantageous for the contributors to give to his Senate race. Dvd Avins (talk) 19:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

ethics
TYPICAL Of wikipedia no mention of his  charged by house with ethic violation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.112.146.36 (talk) 20:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * True. The U.S. Congressman ends up abruptly resigning mid-term in 2014 after an escalation of investigations into his conduct from a 60 Minutes interview with Steve Kroft that provided national exposure of misbehaviors, in turn following initial investigations by the NJ Star-Ledger that exposed very questionable campaign spending, and unusual forms of revenue for a U.S. Congressman. Why is there no mention of this at all in Wikipedia? The non-mention and non-coverage of political improprieties and investigations into the conduct of U.S. politicians is a regular problem here on Wikipedia... The details of the investigation and some of the behaviors that Andrews acknowledges really need to be mentioned here...Stevenmitchell (talk) 07:56, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Biased controversies
These are biased controversies and are in breach of wiki's privacy policy of biographies of living persons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowscarf (talk • contribs) 22:17, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've added a comprehensive section on the alleged misuse of funds, including the eventual dismissals of the complaints. These concerns should be resolved. —  Newslinger  talk   02:23, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Rob Andrews. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070428105042/http://www.house.gov/andrews/about_biography.shtml to http://www.house.gov/andrews/about_biography.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070428105042/http://www.house.gov/andrews/about_biography.shtml to http://www.house.gov/andrews/about_biography.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070428105042/http://www.house.gov/andrews/about_biography.shtml to http://www.house.gov/andrews/about_biography.shtml

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) 07:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rob Andrews. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140202141616/http://www.democraticleader.gov/Pelosi_Announces_Steering_And_Policy_Members to http://www.democraticleader.gov/Pelosi_Announces_Steering_And_Policy_Members

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) 01:29, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Why is so much information missing from this article
Why is so much information missing from this article that applies directly to this article? Wikipedia users would have to read the Talk Page to realize nearly any of the controversy that surrounded this politician over the latter part of his career. He has a fairly long history of controversy regarding his use of campaign funds and at one point his wife was going to replace him as a Congressional Representative, but in true Wikipedian fashion those remarks have been either removed or omitted... Unfortunately, the only mentions of those events are here on the Talk Page, where other editors are questioning these deletions and omissions... Stevenmitchell (talk) 08:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * An excellent question. I came here to note that in the Lead it is noted that he resigned amid investigation of stuff, and this is never mentioned again in the article. The WP:LEAD is supposed to be a brief summary of the rest of the article, and currently it is summarising things that don't exist in the body text. -Roxy, the dog . wooF 08:21, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * the "Alleged misuse of campaign funds" section, which thoroughly describes the controversy. —  Newslinger  talk   04:57, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Whitewashing
This article has been subjected to repeated whitewashing by suspected sockpuppets. Please see and Sockpuppet investigations/Sfj340sfeoem71 for details. —  Newslinger  talk   09:15, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I took an axe to the article. Let's await the CU results on that SPI to see what happens. If these resume fluffers return, I suggest you ask for longterm semi-protection. And maybe one of the regulars, or you, can turn this into a decent BLP... Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:14, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ! I look forward to expanding this article with other interested editors. Since my page protection request was declined (because some of the sockpuppets were autoconfirmed), would you recommend requesting pending changes or extended changes confirmed protection if the single-purpose accounts were to return? —  Newslinger  talk   20:16, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know, Newslinger--I don't even know what ECP is, and PC has always struck me as useless... Drmies (talk) 00:10, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I meant "extended confirmed" (typo), but if you don't think pending changes are useful, then I won't request it. —  Newslinger  talk   02:24, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Who deleted 90% of the article content? Is the deletionist editor going to replace the content, or are they too lazy? Stevenmitchell (talk) 19:14, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * correctly removed the 42% of the article (not 90%) that violated WP:NPOV, WP:NOTPROMO, and WP:NOTRESUME. I'll gradually expand the article with neutral content, and you're welcome to contribute if you're interested. —  Newslinger  talk   21:56, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Dismissed allegation
A user deleted that the complaint was dismissed and instead moved the allegation to the heading of this person.

issue 1: The comment would be better placed in a different section, such as political activities section.

issue 2: half the information was deleted. We cannot give only half of the facts The complaint made by a watchdog group was dismissed.
 * https://nj1015.com/us-closes-case-of-former-nj-congressman-rob-andrews/?trackback=tsmclip
 * https://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/south-jersey/2014/06/03/andrews-cleared/9920605/
 * https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/local/20140604_Ex-U_S__Rep__Rob_Andrews_of_N_J__cleared_in_campaign-fund_complaint.html

Issue 3: The article states that Andrews was expected to announce his "leaving office to join a law firm later that month," and that this was a "financial decision...to send his children to college." I don't know how else that can be interpreted. This is a BLP article and must remain neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMme4u09 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 3 October 2019 (UTC)