Jump to content

Talk:Jay Nixon

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

Many if not most people reading this Article are bound to wonder if he is related to ex-President Richard Nixon....and yet the Article does not inform them. Therefore I have included this information. Perhaps the information might be more appropriately located elsewhere in the Article, but it should nevertheless be included, again because of the sheer volume of readers who are bound to wonder.

So though he's not related to Nixon through his Nixon line it looks like he's probably related through an "Inskeep" line: http://www.nixonlibrary.gov/virtuallibrary/documents/whsfreturned/WHSF_Box_10/WHSF10-16.pdf

As you can see on Richard Nixon's ancestry he's a descendant of John Hussey an Ann Inskeep, which leads back to a John Inskeep of England. You can see on 67 the line John -> John -> Abraham (ancestor of Jay Nixon)... This line is a quaker line.

209.89.62.20 (talk) 03:06, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unless reliable sources normally point out that he is unrelated or an extremely distant cousin, it is not relevant. TFD (talk) 21:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with TFD above. If some direct relation, or, alternatively, its proven he has absolutely no relation to the former President is documented in a reliable source, it would indeed be relevant to include the information. At the moment, the relationship with Richard M. Nixon appears to be distant, at best. Also, the last name Nixon isn't that uncommon in these United States.--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 03:05, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Among white people, everybody is everybody else's 15th cousin or closer. This is mainly because of the mixing of blood which occurred over centuries during the period of the Roman Empire, when Europe was effectively all one nation. But on a social/everyday level, we say that we are "not related". In this sense, the relation between Jay Nixon and President Nixon comes under the same heading; "not related". In fact, they are, as indeed we all are, but only at that "trace" level which is socially described as "not" related.

206.45.247.158 (talk) 22:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Section removed

[edit]

I removed from this article the section 'Penn Valley College incident' detailing an event in September 2010, where two people were stabbed by a student at a school where Nixon was shortly due to speak, who reportedly believed he was attacking Nixon. I assume this was included as an 'assassination attempt', but it actually seems fairly unimportant: Nixon wasn't present at the time so was not in any direct danger, and it's not completely clear if he really was the intended target. It seems excessive to mention it in an article that's supposed to be about Nixon's life and political career, but for anyone curious the incident is still mentioned at Metropolitan Community College (Missouri), the school in question. Robofish (talk) 21:25, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting of Michael Brown / Ferguson, MO problems

[edit]

Wow. Shouldn't this article have a section describing his role as governor during this crisis? It's pretty significant. And there is no lack of reliable sources. Thoughts? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is some mentioning of it, but a certain editor (user:UCA mizzou fan) keeps removing it without ever giving a reason as to why. it has become pretty much repeatedly vandalism. Given the major role governor Nixon played/plays in this continuing drama, it has become one of the defining points of his governorship and thus needs to be mentioned. I've thus added a subsection to the section dealing with his tenure about the Ferguson problems. Feel free to improve it. -- fdewaele, 28

November 2014, 10:37


I removed the information because it does not pertain to the governor himself. His actions were dictated by the laws of the State of Missouri and has not done anything wrong personally. The post I remove tarnishes the reputation of the Governor, and it akin to libel.

It's definitely not libel. You are trying to coat your vandalistic actions with a very thin veneer of indignation but it is a properly sourced criticism which appeared in the media and in major news sources like NYT and WaPo. Given the major role governor Nixon played/plays in this continuing drama, it has become one of the defining points of his governorship and thus needs to be addressed in the article. -- fdewaele, 28 November 2014, 23:55 CET.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Jay Nixon. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 07:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jay Nixon. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 12:01, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What the f*** is going on here?

[edit]

Seriously, this article is shit. Wtf is going on? Why is there so much content in this article, and so few citations? Where the hell are people getting ANY of this information? If people do not provide citations for the content they submit, then it ought to be reverted. IDGAF if it's positive, negative, neutral, etc. I'm considering just deleting a whole bunch of shit, because it's almost entirely unsourced. How t.f. is one supposed to quickly verify that any of this is legit? I'm going to notify a bunch of people who have contributed to this article that they need to include credible sources. If anyone else adds unsourced and unverifiable claims, don't deal with fixing that shit, just revert it. This is f-ing stupid. KnowledgeBattle (Talk) | GodlessInfidel ︻╦╤── 18:53, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Screw it, nevermind. I'm not going to try to find out who posted all that crap, because there have been so many small edits throughout, without anyone ever addressing it, and I don't feel like finding out who did it. Instead, I'll just be deleting the unsourced materials. I'll be deleting it by sections, so that if people wish to re-add those sections later (based on subsection titles), they can quickly refer to what was removed, as their guide for what to add. KnowledgeBattle (Talk) | GodlessInfidel ︻╦╤── 19:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it's October 8, 2016. I've removed a lot of good shit, if any of it is true. But how would I know if any of it's true? What, spend several hours researching it all, to verify? That's what sources are for. If anyone wishes to look into all of the content I've removed, feel free to look at the edits from today, October 8, 2016. Please use proper citation Wiki markups when adding sources. KnowledgeBattle (Talk) | GodlessInfidel ︻╦╤── 19:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jay Nixon. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jay Nixon. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:31, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jay_Nixon&oldid=1251561222"