Talk:Bruce Poliquin

Bias Versus Consensus

It has come to my attention while viewing the talk section and edit history of this page that many of the controversies that former Rep. Bruce Poliquin has been involved in can easily be considered as a "bias" representation rather than the consensus standard of Wikipedia. It is important to note that much of the information sourced for this page comes from one of two Maine-based journals; the Portland Press Herald and the Bangor Daily News. One should also note that Maine is a relatively sparsely populated state in the U.S. and does not have an oversaturation of media to report on the activities of politicians from diverse perspectives. For this reason, it is difficult to extrapolate the broader opinion of Maine people from the dozen or less political pundits who specialise in the small state. However, in the absence of this certainty, it is up to Wikipedia contributors to be patient with one another and allow Maine citizens a larger role in the editing of Maine-related content. Nitpicking the opinions drawn directly from Maine experts employed by Maine publications discounts the way in which locals experience the reality of political controversy, and offering to general of an opinion limits the utility of Wikipedia as a 'jumping off point' for curious explorers of knowledge looking to deepen their understanding of their own community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SunshineIsabella (talk • contribs) 00:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Tree growth

We may want to mention the controversy over his oceanfront property being in the Tree Growth program, which Democrats said was to avoid taxes. 331dot (talk) 02:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia or DKosopedia?

This article reads like a hit piece on Poliquin. While none of the individual factoids in the "State Treasurer" section are inaccurate, or poorly cited, the entire tone of the section is thoroughly negative. The one snippet which might be considered as neutral or positive is poisoned by the wording of the statement. "At the end of his term, Poliquin wrote an op-ed in the Bangor Daily News with a list of what he believed to be his accomplishments as Treasurer" is not in any meaningful sense a neutral presentation of the op-ed, and every single other cited claim in that section in negative, primarily accusations from the opposition. Since I am not a resident of Maine, I don't know how his tenure was received by the electorate in the state, but according to this article, his term in office was nothing but scandal, conflict of interest, and opportunistic carpetbagging. While I note the change in residence to reside in the district in which he is running, I don't see a note that the Constitution doesn't require representatives to live in the district which they represent, nor do I see any mention of the just-before-campaign moves in the BLPs of Sean Eldridge or Joe Bock, both of whom have been have been accused of similar actions, particularly Bock, who represented a state legislative district in Missouri before running for a congressional seat in Indiana. Poliquin was born and raised in the US state in which his congressional district lies, unlike Eldridge (who was born in Montreal) and Bock (who was born in Missouri).

I arrived at this article via a Google search, but the difference between me and the average Google searcher is that I have eight years and over 19,000 edits to Wikipedia, and therefore understand that a problem exists with this article as currently structured. I have flagged the article as {{unbalanced}} until the NPOV issues are fixed. If I were an ordinary reader, I would not have been given an appropriately neutral BLP of this individual, and that is simply unacceptable. Horologium (talk) 05:38, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I worded the part about the op-ed that way in an attempt to be more neutral; those who do not share his philosophy would not view what he had done as "accomplishments"- but I invite you to word it more neutrally if you feel that needs it. I also did not feel it necessary to provide a complete Constitutional history on residency, but I don't object to doing so. I also did not think comparisons needed to be made to other politicians(especially ones that I could not cite) as that sounds like original research to me(I know nearby New Hampshire candidiate Scott Brown moved there from Mass.) but if it would help, I don't object to that either.

As a Mainer I can indeed attest that his term as Treasurer was known for what is in this article. The Maine State Treasurer is normally a low-profile position(which is not usually reported on by the media and other reliable sources) but Poliquin drew attention to himself through his controversy. He has also been criticized as stated for moving his residence to run for political office(His primary opponent ran a TV ad with a baby and said "this baby has lived in the district longer than Bruce Poliquin"). I can only put what there are sources for in the article- if you know of sources for more "positive" information, please post them. 331dot (talk) 10:54, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

You misunderstood why I mentioned other candidates with election-related residency changes. I did not mean to imply that they should be mentioned in this article, or that their articles need to address the issue, but rather to point out that it is undue weight to have more than a passing mention of the topic in this article. It's mentioned twice; the first instance is a totally gratuitous phrase tacked on to the end of the "personal" section, which needs to be excised entirely. The second one is more appropriate, as it is properly cited, and is marginally relevant to the campaign, but it should be reduced to a single sentence, without the judgmental tone the current version conveys.

An article doesn't need to be equal parts praise and criticism, but unless someone turns out to be spectacularly inept or corrupt, there should be some mention of his successes as well as his failures, but as a non-resident (I'm across the country) it's hard to identify what the local media are reporting about, but looking at the articles on his predecessor and successor, his article is much larger, and it's all negative. Since I don't have subscriptions to any of the major Maine newspapers (unsurprising, since I live in Washington and have no ties to Maine), it's difficult to comb through the online archives and find out what's been said. Yes, there are a lot of people who don't like him, but would he have been replaced if the Republicans retained control of the state legislature? The partisan control flip appears to be the only reason he was replaced. Again, Maine residents will have a better idea of how he was viewed in the state, but the laundry list of partisan grievances is almost unique among articles about Maine State Treasurer; the only other one is Dale McCormick, but the controversy addressed on her page is not about her term as Treasurer, but later, over a dispute—with Poliquin. Horologium (talk) 22:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I removed the duplicate sentence; thanks for pointing that out. I've also reworded the other mention and added a line about the US Constitution.

It's probably likely he would have been re-chosen had the GOP retained the Legislature. As I said, the Maine State Treasurer is normally a low-profile position which is why the other Treasurers have little info about them. Poliquin made efforts to have a higher profile(which if I get time I could probably find sources for) and promoted his ideological similarities with Governor LePage. I included the op-ed mention (written by him) despite it being an op-ed to attempt to have more "successes" that he had; there is probably more sources out there for that too, again given time. 331dot (talk) 02:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bruce Poliquin. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/gop-congressman-brushes-off-criticism-health-care-vote-28787435

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:48, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Archived URL was not useful. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:58, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Campaign finance

I removed this content due to a number of issues I see with it. First, it says Poliquin "has raised far more than the average incumbent Representatives running for re-election." "Far more" is WP:WEASEL wording. How much more? Which election cycle does this refer to? Second, "Only 1% of his campaign contributions have been small individual donations." Why are we singling out "small individual donations" (what is the definition of that, anyway? Is that OpenSecrets terminology?). The source says 49% of his contributions are from individual donors, 1% "small" and 48% "large." What editorial reason is there for focusing on the "small" rather than individual contributors overall? Strikes me as a slanted presentation of the source. Finally, "In addition, 45% of Poliquin's campaign contributions come from out of State, especially New York and Massachusetts, and the majority of his in-state contributions come from outside of the 2nd District, i.e., from the financial centers in the southern part of the State of Maine (the 1st District)." This is WP:OR. Where in the source does it say anything about where the financial center of Maine are, or how that is relevant? Overall, this information was taking up way too much real estate and seemed WP:POINTY. A sentence or two on campaign finance is fine and standard. Usually an WP:EL to OpenSecrets will do. The information presented also failed to include any dates, making it unclear whether this was for the 2016 election cycle, a different election cycle, or all of his campaigns combined. Champaign Supernova (talk) 15:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I suspected that was the case- I was accused of 'playing politics' when I initially removed the passage, though I didn't have the well-written argument you make. 331dot (talk) 21:23, 7 September 2016 (UTC)