Talk:Steve Russell (politician)

small change re snark
Nice one to put in his hobbies "taking 23,500$ for selling out the neutrality of the internet" -- if you want to make the point on political donations, please have a separate section on that. As a non-American and not knowing much on these issues, I think I am clearly NPOV, and removed this phrasing, as it is not to standard, nor is it referenced. Hundnase (talk) 08:24, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

is the subject of this page editing it frequently?
The article at https://www.thelostogle.com/2018/11/01/steve-russell-edits-his-own-wikipedia-page/ suggests with some confidence that user Regular122, who has made many edits to this page, is also the subject of it, in contravention of Wikipedia etiquette. Therefore, should all the edits made by Regular122 be reverted? Lowlyeditor (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Re. the "Scandal" section
I'm not sure this warrants its whole section.

As of right now, it's not a major controversy (in my opinion), although it is quite annoying.

Maybe this could be included in a paragraph about his 2018 re-election campaign?  Programming Geek talk to me 00:34, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Election results in the lead
I think it's worth mentioning that the subject lost their re-election bid in the lead, that's an important detail for a politician. I don't think it's quite so important to mention who they lost to, but it also doesn't make the article much longer so it's probably worth mentioning as well. User:Regular122, can you explain why you think it should be removed? The WP:lead is supposed to summarise important details that are in the article. Nil Einne (talk) 13:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)