Talk:Tim Walz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you were canvassed to come to this page[edit]

If you have received or seen a request on a talk page to edit this article, please note that there has been frequent recent occurrences of a blocked sockfarm visiting talk pages to try and get other editors to edit this page for them. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 13:35, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Making this article NPOV[edit]

I'm not sure if the POV template is a little harsh, but I really think that the biography needs to be re-written in an NPOV way. It really reads like a campaign ad. What do other people think? MicahMN | Talk 19:44, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. The article needs work. Boubelium
I did some minor editing. I think it's fine now. John Broughton 13:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victory[edit]

The page had been updated to state that he is the incumbent, but still listed CNN's 52-48 projection for Gil Gutknecht so I removed that section. Someone should add something about his win.


Catholic, not Lutheran[edit]

This entry has Mr. Walz's religious affiliation wrong. He's Catholic, it says as much on his campaign website. I'll correct it, if there's no objections. --Wgbc2032 Dec. 14, 11:28 PM (Pacific) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.119.36.144 (talk) 07:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't quite know how to use the editing tools on this site, but shouldn't the biographical entries on an online encyclopedia be, well, accurate? The section headed Religious affiliation contradicts nndb.com, the National Journal profile of new members of congress, and Mr. Walz's own campaign website. I don't live in Minnesota, and I've never met Mr. Walz, so I don't pretend to have inside information as to his religious convictions, but unless there is some reason to list him as Lutheran I'm going to change it again. 24.119.36.144 (talk)

I added a citation from his campaign website - Catholic it is. If the National Journal disagrees, it is probably wrong. Appraiser 21:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose it's conceivable someone could praise the Catholic values they grew up with despite having converted to Lutheranism, but I'd say his site is a pretty authoritative source :) and it says nothing about any later-life conversions. Thanks for documenting this. - PhilipR 21:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This news release from four days ago [1] states that's he's Lutheran, and a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. I'll revise the page, with an edit comment to see the talk page. MisfitToys 23:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Lutherans are claiming him. But these two organizations disagree [2] and [3]. On a website presumably approve by Walz [4], it mentions that he was raised Catholic, but says nothing about now being Lutheran. I would think that if he had converted to Lutheranism, he would have proclaimed that fact in campaign literature, as Lutheranism probably dominates his district. I don't know the real answer, but I'm certainly not convinced based on the Lutheran organization claiming him. Appraiser 00:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked Project Vote Smart, a website which gives issue surveys to candidates, and Mr. Walz religion is listed as Lutheran (Raised Catholic). If I had to venture a guess, his wife is Lutheran and he attends services with her. But as long as he's being listed under both religions, I don't think it matters too much. I don't know if anyone remembers how Rep. Jim Gibbons was for years listed as Protestant even though he's Mormon. Again, so long as it's debatable, it doesn't seem like too big an issue.24.119.36.144 (talk)

Project Vote smart[5] "Biographical Data Collection Process - Every candidate for office is sent a copy of our biographical form when they are sent the National Political Awareness Test. Additional data is collected from the candidate or elected official's website. Please call our Voter's Research Hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART (1-888-868-3762) for more information." Assuming Walz provided the "Lutheran (raised Catholic)", I'll put it just like that on his infobox with this citation. (To future readers: I will revert it to that wording unless a more viable source is cited. And please justify any change here. Thanks.) Appraiser 15:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Three and a half months after pushing this, I'd like to change Mr. Walz religious affiliation given in the infobox yet again. The 'raised Catholic' in parenthesis just seems like erroneous information. I'm keeping the Project Vote Smart link so that information is still available. --Wgbc2032 20:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you have a source that is more reliable than the Project Vote Smart, who claims to have received its information from the candidate? I'll change it back unless someone cites a more reliable source. The article should match the citation. Also, on his campaign website, "his parents instilled him with Catholic values."[6]. That is pretty unambiguous to me. --Appraiser 21:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I changed the tag to simply Lutheran was because I've felt, ever since we had this debate months ago, that the religion he was raised in didn't need to be included in the infobox. It seemed like information that, while not irrelevent, would be better suited for the article itself than the infobox. For the record I didn't at all question the information in Project Vote Smart's survey, and I kept it there as a source (I'm the one who brought it up in the first place). I wasn't trying to challenge his religious upbringing I just felt it was wrong to place which religion he was raised in in a category generally meant to show which faith a certain politician currently identifies with. That said, this debate (which, again, I'm guilty of starting) ended long ago and maybe I was wrong to try and revive it. Since Mr. Walz religion is reported rather inconsistently, maybe the current tag was a good compromise. I'd prefer it if someone moved this information into the article, but I won't push this any longer. --Wgbc2032 00:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • My concern is that the information from the cited source matches what we put there. To omit part of his response to PVS seems mis-leading. It would be OK to change it and also change the source, as long as source is deemed reliable.--Appraiser 13:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the Issues section it states that Walz is a teacher and against MERIT-PAY "to punish teachers". This is a very partisan statement. Only the Teachers Union or Oppenents of Merit-Pay consider it a punishment. Those who support it would call it "incentive". The "punishment" portion of this statement should be removed, or else it should say that Walz "considers Merit-Pay punishment for Teachers"; in which case a sitation would be needed. I think some of those who edit this page need to remember that the point of this page isn't to help Walz win re-election. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.162.133.67 (talk) 13:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tim Walz. 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:

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

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 18:26, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Tim Walz. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tim Walz. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of review for WikiProject Military History[edit]

While a significant number of the paragraphs contain citations/references, several paragraphs are still missing citations/references. In addition, there are individual statements within this article which would benefit from the use of inline citations, as well as several sentences which would benefit from editing to improve phrasing and/or flow for readers of the article. 47thPennVols (talk) 19:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rank[edit]

Tim Walz retired from the National Guard as a Master Sergeant. He conditionally served as a command sergeant major, but did not retain the rank since he did not complete the Sergeant's Major Academy, nor did he serve as a sergeant major for 24 months. Claims that he is a retired command sergeant major are not accurate. Claims that he is the highest ranking enlisted soldier to serve in Congress are factually not true, and self serving. Senator John Tower retired as a Master Chief Petty Officer (E9), and Tim Walz retired as a Master Sergeant (E8).

I agree the NGB22 and 23 form has the final say on the individuals rank. This format is not used for other notable figures who have been demoted like Bowe Bergdahl or other demoted Generals. Until it can be substantiated that he held the rank by showing he attended relevant PME and held the MOS 00Z,then he never actually held the rank.JamboJuice (talk) 03:19, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bergdahl was court-martialed and demoted to the lowest enlisted rank along with being sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, the result of a punitive measure. Walz was conditionally promoted to sergeant major, then returned to master sergeant when he didn't complete his PME as an administrative rule. Likening the latter to the former is disingenuous; Walz was never punitively demoted. Walz held the sergeant major rank from the time he was promoted to the time he was returned back to master sergeant. It is incorrect to assert he "never held the rank" on the grounds that he never ended up going to the sergeant major PME course; he held the rank the day the promotion order was issued, conditional or not. He then held the rank of master sergeant again down the road after he didn't complete his PME. Accordingly, the highest rank he attained was sergeant major. There is nothing misleading or inappropriate with informing readers that the highest rank he attained was sergeant major, especially since the expanded details are included in the first section of the article body. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 18:37, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So then you can provide his promotion papers since he held that rank. Otherwise we had master Sargents be acting first Sargents all the time. Doesn't mean they ever achieved that ran nor would it show on a dd214 or there be promotion orders 2600:6C46:4F7F:DC8F:10F7:149:40D3:15C0 (talk) 21:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's delusional, Berghdal was demoted for not meeting the standards of military service. Walz was demoted for not meeting the standards of not only his PME but not fufilling the terms of his contract and not holding the required billet/MOS 00Z. Both are adverse and punitive for failing to meet Army Regulations and Requirements, there is no such thing as a non-punitive demotion. You cannot have a reversion in rank unless there was an adverse action that precipitated it. All regulations regarding demotions come from the same Army Manual AR 600-8-19. You need to cite your source in there that proves that. Otherwise you're making things up. 

He failed the requirements during the process known as frocking, it's a very deliberate decision to allow people to wear the rank until they are properly qualified and a vacancy is open in that MOS billet. However your frocking period does not count as time held in rank or count towards retirement nor is it recorded in his official records that he had authority to hold that grade. Therefore it's perfectly okay to say he never held it because HE NEVER OFFICIALLY HELD TIME IN RANK NOR THE AUTHORITY, This is reflected in the NGB 22 and 23A, it is not not noted there, therefore it is not official. He only wore the insignia.

  Because he never completed PME, he was never assigned a billet, because he never held a billet, he never left his frocking period. Not recognizing this key difference in frocked promotions and official promotions IS MISLEADING AND DISINGENIOUS.

I also remind you that there is a wikipedia article that covers this very process and my edits and talk have been consumerate with the information contained therein. You should familiarize yourself with military customs and regulations. Before you make unnecessary reversions as noted in the Wikipedia:BOLD JamboJuice (talk) 12:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deployment "In Support of the Global War on Terror"[edit]

Walz claims that his deployment to Italy was in support of the Global War on Terror. Italy is considered an OCONUS duty station. Walz does not have any campaign medals, or a Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, and therefore his deployment was not in support of the Global War on Terror. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwmnpozx (talk • contribs) 14:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:38, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Order of Precedence[edit]

As of Nov. 27, 2020 the order of precedence has changed, Mayors of that city are not directly after the Governor of the State — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:448:100:CE40:A436:A085:9AB7:2B58 (talk) 23:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Army Service[edit]

The military service portion is incorrect. It lists US Army National Guard as the branch.

There are only 5 branches of the military: Army, Navy, Marine, Air Force, and Coast Guard.

The Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard have two components: Active and Reserve.

The Army and Air Force have 3 components: Active, Reserve, and National Guard.

The correct description should read, “Branch/Component: US Army, Minnesota Army National Guard.”

Or simply, “US Army.” 2601:442:4680:8390:6CDB:39C3:E3FE:2A76 (talk) 01:33, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How weird, then, that we have an entire article about the Army National Guard, fully sourced, and fully clickable as a link in the very spot you are referencing. Grandpallama (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Beau Biden’s page. That’s how it should look. Brbu002 (talk) 12:26, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Beau Biden’s page. That’s how it should look. Brbu002 (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Billboards[edit]

Hello, I feel there should be a ban on billboards in Winona Minnesota and probably the state of Minnesota. They are Very distracting, pretty comparable to looking down on you phone in your car , instead of looking down your looking to the side trying to read the Billboards.it,s pretty much the same thing. There are numerous states that don’t allow Billboards, I’m sure in part of safety to drivers. Now they even have digital ones , so numerous advertising on the one board. Please take the time to read this. I’ve seen numerous people crossing lanes while reading the boards. I feel trying to make our roadways safe for everyone should be a priority. Thank you for your time,Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.138.204.150 (talk) 18:35, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 March 2023[edit]

His highest rank was first sergeant as he never attended the sergeant major’s course. He retired a first sergeant. 2601:445:180:EC90:89E7:FECB:2F7A:1FF2 (talk) 12:41, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 14:05, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 March 2023[edit]

Change gun policy since it's horribly out of date German2k2k (talk) 22:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Actualcpscm (talk) 22:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 June 2023[edit]

In the section regarding Tim Walz's Position on Gun Rights, he is now more supportive of Gun Control Measures and has signed many pieces of legislation regarding that into law and has advocating for the restriction of Assault Weapons, and the NRA now gives him an F Rating which he has said "doesn't keep me up at night" Sunnyboi18 (talk) 05:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find that quote, but I did note that the section was out of date so I've updated it. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 17:01, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, he said it in his 2023 Minnesota State of the State Speech, and this is the article from NBC KARE 11 Minneapolis, with it! Gov. Walz delivers annual State of the State Address | kare11.com. Sunnyboi18 (talk) 01:39, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for providing the link. I'm unfortunately unable to use that as it's blocked in Ireland (where I edit from) and the Wayback Machine excludes it, so I may have to defer this to another user to implement. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 12:55, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The exact quote is, "I know guns as well as anyone else in this room ... I’m not just a veteran, or a hunter, or a gun owner. I’m a dad. And for many years, I was a teacher. I know that there’s no place for weapons of war in our schools, or in our churches, or in our banks, or anywhere else people are just trying to live their lives without fear ... I got an A rating from the NRA my first term in Congress. Now I get straight F’s. And I sleep just fine." So can't really blame the search engine for not finding it. Anyway, I'm closing this request as:

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Xan747 (talk) 21:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 August 2023[edit]

Tim walz never served in operation enduring freedom

Also never officially obtained the rank of Command Sargent major, so could never be reduced in rank because he was a temporary appointment to the command position.

[redacted BLP violation and link to unreliable and copyrighted source] Kablammo (talk) 16:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.

Also see the final sentence of the article that you left out: This is a paid endorsement letter to the editor.

Finally, your extended copy-paste of the source is likely a copyright violation. Xan747 ✈️ 🧑‍✈️ 21:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tim_Walz&oldid=1211877159"