Talk:Nick Rahall

Re-Worked the "Tenure" Section

Previously many of Rahall's issue positions and legislative accomplishments had been crammed together under the "tenure" section. I have renamed the section "Issues" (a much more appropriate name for the info that is there) and broken each issue out by section, i also added a few in an earlier edit. i did not remove/add any information when doing this.

i think the section is much more manageable now and easier to find info on an issue as it relates to his position.

More Speculation and Opinion than Facts

In the second paragraph of this article, it is speculated that Congressman Rahall dropped out of George Washington University purely because of the ending of the draft but no source is given to confirm if that is a fact or pure coincidence.

Also, it is speculated in the second paragraph of this article that just because Congressman Rahall worked under Senator Byrd, that he is "racist", but of course just as before, there is no source to verify this statement. Working under Senator Byrd is not enough evidence to claim that Rahall shares his views in itself. On that same note, just because Rahall is of Lebanese decent does not mean that is the motivation behind is voting record on the Middle East. All of these above statements would be fine if there were sources to back them up.

I feel these statements should be removed from this "article" if sources cannot be cited to support these claims...if there are no sources to support these claims, then it is apparent that this is not an article, but instead it's someone's opinion piece.

--Caponer 06:47, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Caponer on this. I am going to remove the comment on him agreeing with Byrd's views on race, since there is no evidence that he is racist. Most of the other stuff added recently is mere speculation and should also be tossed. Youngamerican 16:02, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

• I've made adjustments to the article to remove POV statements as much as possible. Would still like to see some sources, however. Youngamerican 16:12, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

There is way too much that is purposely written in a negative way, irrelevant, or made up. -Ernie

Nick Rahall doesn't really know what is happening in the Middle East. He should get a clue: Israel was attacked and is responding to aggression. Its escaped his notice Israel is still under attack. Its not Israel's responsibility to let Hezbollah go unharmed; its the job of the Lebanese to dismantle the state within a state that keeps them from having a fully normal life. Hezbollah must be destroyed for there to be peace. At the moment, I think the humane solution would be for Israel's Air Force to turn Hezbollahland into good-sized parking lots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SoCalJustice (talk • contribs)

I was a little surprised to see that his positions in the Middle East were only briefly mentioned. I know that he is know to have a pretty big interest there. In this article, for instance, he says: "Israel can’t continue to occupy, humiliate and destroy the dreams and spirits of the Palestinian people and continue to call itself a democratic state." 100 red balloons (talk) 21:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Was just reading a news article which states Rahall is a mason and knights templar. If true it ought to be relevent to this page. http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090928/pl_politico/27639

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 00:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Lebanese Descent

I find it somewhat odd that the second line of his "early life" section is that he is of Lebanese descent. If he was born in the United States (he was) to parents born in the United States (not sure), then it seems extraneous. We don't include that various public figures are of Irish, or English, or German descent at the top of their bios. This particularly caught my notice because attack ads have been run against Rahall recently based on his ethnicity [1]. Arbor832466 (talk) 23:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Rahall as Arab America

Recent edits have added excessive, unsourced text emphasizing Rahall's ethnic background. I am going to revert. This whole page needs a massive overhaul and ought to be referred to the bio page for more intensive edits. Hammerpleasedonthurtem (talk) 04:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Untrue. They are both clearly accurate. And sourced. To RSs. In the text in the body of the article. Where they should be sourced. It is a significant part of his notability, noted in all manner of RSs on him, such as reflected in the article and here and here, and properly therefore reflected in the lede. Please don't again delete appropriate RS-supported material. I understand that you are new, and may have your personal point of view, but we follow the RSs and wikipedia guidelines. --Epeefleche (talk) 05:38, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I understand that you are experienced, but what significance does links to two Google searches demonstrate about the reliability or notability of your sources? You might refamiliarize yourself with WP:BLP, specifically the points about how these biographies are to be edited conservatively. At present, this article is the epitome of a WP:COAT with the ostensible aim of libeling Rahall and making statements about the Arab-Israeli conflict. There is absolutely no reason to mention his position on Israel in the lede any more than there is to describe his position on mining or TARP, for example. Hammerpleasedonthurtem (talk) 14:33, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

The refs supplied evidence sufficiently the fact that it is an important aspect of his career, covered in the RSs, and therefore appropriate for the lede. The additional google searches reflect amply the broad coverage by many RSs -- in addition to the refs supplied -- of the same. He is a public figure; a politician taking public positions. You do not understand what libel is if you think that reflecting his public positions on facts from his biography -- all as amply covered by RSs -- is "libel". It's not even close. --Epeefleche (talk) 17:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

You linked to a Google search between the terms "Nick","Rahall", and "muslim". What are the 25,000 search results intended to confirm? That the internet has abundant misinformation? Does this referencing "RS" work for you on other talk pages? Hammerpleasedonthurtem (talk) 20:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Came here to take a look from post at WP:BLP/N. I have made a few edits to conform the article to our BLP policies to the best of my ability. See edit summaries for details. Happy editing! - Cwobeel (talk) 15:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your efforts. One point -- you deleted from the lede the fact -- appropriately referenced in the text to an RS -- that he is considered one of the most "endangered" House Democrats by the House Democratic campaign committee. Your edit summary stated: "don't needed either in the lede". The question of course is not whether it is needed in the lede, but whether it is appropriate. The fact is certainly an important aspect of an article on him, and as such appropriate per wp:lede. It relates to the race he is currently in. It is a position taken by his own party's campaign committee. It is RS-supported. It distinguishes him significantly from other House members. It provides important context. I don't see any reason for its deletion. Epeefleche (talk) 17:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

What "context" does it provide that is lede worthy? He was labeled endangered in other elections, so 2014 is not any different. It does not belong in the lede. Also I note that your recent edit did not restore that point, but reverted to the far more irrelevant and less lede-worthy text that "He was the only member of the House to oppose the 1993 resolution for an end to the Arab boycott of Israel." Hammerpleasedonthurtem (talk) 20:48, 2 October 2014 (UTC)