This article was nominated for deletion on May 29, 2017. The result of the discussion was delete. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have now repeatedly deleted a section on the "2nd Amendment" due to lack of appropriate sourcing. In its most recent version, it had three references - one was to "South Dakota War College", a seemingly self-published blog-and-comment site, which would violate WP:BLPSPS. The second was a source on the sd.gov site... but the link was not functioning. The final was to an article that didn't mention Ravnsborg at all. Additionally, this section was spinning the subject as a "strong support of the 2nd Amendment" when there is vast disagreement about what that amendment means - as seen by the use of the inappropriate spin term "Constitutional Carry" in that section to describe the lack of requirement for a gun permit. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 04:51, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
==I wrote about this subject patterning off of other AG pages, like Ken Paxton of Texas. AG Paxton lists many similar sign-ons on his page to the one I posted about the Sprint/T-Mobile merger. Another article I see was an Equifax settlement by someone else, but I don't see how these are different than other AGs, who have similar posts. I think they both should be included. SDEditor101 ( talk) 16:48, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Someone just replaced a statement that Ravnsborg claimed he had hit a deer with saying that he said that he had hit a deer, citing WP:CLAIM. However, WP:CLAIM doesn't say to never use "claim"; rather it notes that the word has implications that the statement made might be false. (To write that someone asserted or claimed something can call their statement's credibility into question, by emphasizing any potential contradiction or implying a disregard for evidence.) That makes it perfectly reasonable to use here, because the statement, from all reliable reporting, was indeed false. He had not hit a deer. Calling the statement's credibility into question is not improper. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 16:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Mr. Ravnsborg's 911 call recording has been released, and he does not say that he hit a deer, contrary to what is currently claimed in the lede. ("He had initially called 911 and reported that he had hit a deer that had totaled his car.") The closest the 911 call comes is:
Refs:
-- ToE 01:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Billmckern has been trying to edit-war out of the introduction that the article's subject hit a man with his car. He has given no reason for wanting that information deleted. He is making sure to include positive things that the subject did afterward -- calling to report an incident, finding the corpse the next day (although he seems not to like the word "corpse", which carries the information that the body was dead.) That he hit that pedestrian is not a matter of conflict; it is something that the subject has admitted, and it is a piece of information carried repeatedly in the sources used in the body of the article. It is a far more important information than a listing of what he did afterward. Is there anyone else who wants to make the case that we should not restore the status quo of mentioning this key deed? -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 18:26, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
As an uninvolved third-party, I believe that the version preferred by Billmckern is a better choice. The one favored by NatGertler can be confusing and is written in a way that suggests Ravnsborg was instantaneously aware that he had hit and killed someone. While that may be true, it's not supported by references and is borderline defamatory. Pichpich ( talk) 23:38, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
@ NatGertler: @ Billmckern: I insist that if this conversation continues, that it take place at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard, so we can get some mediation here, as the conversation is very anti-productive right now. Curbon7 ( talk) 21:22, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
One investigator noted Ravnsborg called 911 at 10:24 p.m. and had unlocked his phone just four minutes earlier. "You signed into your Yahoo! mail account," the unidentified investigator said while looking at information he said was compiled from Ravnsborg's phone records. He noted that the attorney general then visited the Dakota Free Press, which describes itself as a liberal news site, and a minute later, the conservative website Real Clear Politics.
Then, about a minute later, this article was pulled up on the 'Just the News' website," he continued, referring to a conservative political news site founded by John Solomon, a journalist known for his stories trafficking in right-wing conspiracy theories about the Biden family. The investigator said Ravnsborg clicked on a story about Joe Biden and China. "Mm-hm," Ravnsborg replied. "I remember looking at it and that's when I set my phone down, prior to" the accident, he said.
The investigator then said, "We're looking at a minute to two minutes before you call 911. The concern being is that we know from the time of impact, there was a time period that went by before you called 911. You had to realize what was going on, come to a stop, get your bearings back about you, get out, look at the damage, figure out what's going on," the investigator said, estimating that would have been one to two minutes. "I guess, yeah," Ravnsborg replied. The attorney general, a Republican, maintained that he was not looking at his phone at the time of the crash, and he has insisted that he didn't know that he had hit a person until the next day when he returned to the accident scene and found the body.
In his 911 call, he said he hit something "in the middle of the road." Asked by the operator if it was a deer, he said, "I have no idea." "It could be," he said. He told the investigators it felt like a "thunderbolt" had hit his car. In another part of the interview made public earlier this week, investigators pressed Ravnsborg on why he hadn't realized he had hit a person, noting that Boever's broken glasses were found inside the attorney general's Ford Taurus. "His face was in your windshield, Jason, think about that,” one of the investigators told him.
starship .paint ( exalt) 07:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
When I noticed that mention of the two Iowa speeding tickets had been removed, I reversed the deletion since they were a part of the same cited story that mentioned all the other tickets. The reporter who wrote that story thought it was relevant and because of the high profile of the case (the top LEO in the state, a chronic speeder, killed a pedestrian) the paper's editor almost certainly took a look at the story before it went to print and was also okay with it as being important enough to be included. Lastly, at the time when the A.G. was due to get sentenced for the fatal accident in just four days, he got still another speeding ticket. Activist ( talk) 20:25, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Right now the lead does not mention his impeachment by the state house of representatives. Impeachment strikes me as a pretty big deal worthy of mention there. We have a full section in the article about the incident which led to the death, his misdemeanor convictions, and his impeachment. We have a full paragraph about it in the lead. The impeachment strikes me as a logical addition to that paragraph. I would have added it myself but I wanted to see if it is being omitted for some reason. What do others think? -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:11, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Billmckern. That's a good summary. And Muboshgu, I agree and I will remove the victim's name from the lead. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:52, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on May 29, 2017. The result of the discussion was delete. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have now repeatedly deleted a section on the "2nd Amendment" due to lack of appropriate sourcing. In its most recent version, it had three references - one was to "South Dakota War College", a seemingly self-published blog-and-comment site, which would violate WP:BLPSPS. The second was a source on the sd.gov site... but the link was not functioning. The final was to an article that didn't mention Ravnsborg at all. Additionally, this section was spinning the subject as a "strong support of the 2nd Amendment" when there is vast disagreement about what that amendment means - as seen by the use of the inappropriate spin term "Constitutional Carry" in that section to describe the lack of requirement for a gun permit. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 04:51, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
==I wrote about this subject patterning off of other AG pages, like Ken Paxton of Texas. AG Paxton lists many similar sign-ons on his page to the one I posted about the Sprint/T-Mobile merger. Another article I see was an Equifax settlement by someone else, but I don't see how these are different than other AGs, who have similar posts. I think they both should be included. SDEditor101 ( talk) 16:48, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Someone just replaced a statement that Ravnsborg claimed he had hit a deer with saying that he said that he had hit a deer, citing WP:CLAIM. However, WP:CLAIM doesn't say to never use "claim"; rather it notes that the word has implications that the statement made might be false. (To write that someone asserted or claimed something can call their statement's credibility into question, by emphasizing any potential contradiction or implying a disregard for evidence.) That makes it perfectly reasonable to use here, because the statement, from all reliable reporting, was indeed false. He had not hit a deer. Calling the statement's credibility into question is not improper. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 16:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Mr. Ravnsborg's 911 call recording has been released, and he does not say that he hit a deer, contrary to what is currently claimed in the lede. ("He had initially called 911 and reported that he had hit a deer that had totaled his car.") The closest the 911 call comes is:
Refs:
-- ToE 01:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Billmckern has been trying to edit-war out of the introduction that the article's subject hit a man with his car. He has given no reason for wanting that information deleted. He is making sure to include positive things that the subject did afterward -- calling to report an incident, finding the corpse the next day (although he seems not to like the word "corpse", which carries the information that the body was dead.) That he hit that pedestrian is not a matter of conflict; it is something that the subject has admitted, and it is a piece of information carried repeatedly in the sources used in the body of the article. It is a far more important information than a listing of what he did afterward. Is there anyone else who wants to make the case that we should not restore the status quo of mentioning this key deed? -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 18:26, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
As an uninvolved third-party, I believe that the version preferred by Billmckern is a better choice. The one favored by NatGertler can be confusing and is written in a way that suggests Ravnsborg was instantaneously aware that he had hit and killed someone. While that may be true, it's not supported by references and is borderline defamatory. Pichpich ( talk) 23:38, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
@ NatGertler: @ Billmckern: I insist that if this conversation continues, that it take place at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard, so we can get some mediation here, as the conversation is very anti-productive right now. Curbon7 ( talk) 21:22, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
One investigator noted Ravnsborg called 911 at 10:24 p.m. and had unlocked his phone just four minutes earlier. "You signed into your Yahoo! mail account," the unidentified investigator said while looking at information he said was compiled from Ravnsborg's phone records. He noted that the attorney general then visited the Dakota Free Press, which describes itself as a liberal news site, and a minute later, the conservative website Real Clear Politics.
Then, about a minute later, this article was pulled up on the 'Just the News' website," he continued, referring to a conservative political news site founded by John Solomon, a journalist known for his stories trafficking in right-wing conspiracy theories about the Biden family. The investigator said Ravnsborg clicked on a story about Joe Biden and China. "Mm-hm," Ravnsborg replied. "I remember looking at it and that's when I set my phone down, prior to" the accident, he said.
The investigator then said, "We're looking at a minute to two minutes before you call 911. The concern being is that we know from the time of impact, there was a time period that went by before you called 911. You had to realize what was going on, come to a stop, get your bearings back about you, get out, look at the damage, figure out what's going on," the investigator said, estimating that would have been one to two minutes. "I guess, yeah," Ravnsborg replied. The attorney general, a Republican, maintained that he was not looking at his phone at the time of the crash, and he has insisted that he didn't know that he had hit a person until the next day when he returned to the accident scene and found the body.
In his 911 call, he said he hit something "in the middle of the road." Asked by the operator if it was a deer, he said, "I have no idea." "It could be," he said. He told the investigators it felt like a "thunderbolt" had hit his car. In another part of the interview made public earlier this week, investigators pressed Ravnsborg on why he hadn't realized he had hit a person, noting that Boever's broken glasses were found inside the attorney general's Ford Taurus. "His face was in your windshield, Jason, think about that,” one of the investigators told him.
starship .paint ( exalt) 07:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
When I noticed that mention of the two Iowa speeding tickets had been removed, I reversed the deletion since they were a part of the same cited story that mentioned all the other tickets. The reporter who wrote that story thought it was relevant and because of the high profile of the case (the top LEO in the state, a chronic speeder, killed a pedestrian) the paper's editor almost certainly took a look at the story before it went to print and was also okay with it as being important enough to be included. Lastly, at the time when the A.G. was due to get sentenced for the fatal accident in just four days, he got still another speeding ticket. Activist ( talk) 20:25, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Right now the lead does not mention his impeachment by the state house of representatives. Impeachment strikes me as a pretty big deal worthy of mention there. We have a full section in the article about the incident which led to the death, his misdemeanor convictions, and his impeachment. We have a full paragraph about it in the lead. The impeachment strikes me as a logical addition to that paragraph. I would have added it myself but I wanted to see if it is being omitted for some reason. What do others think? -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:11, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Billmckern. That's a good summary. And Muboshgu, I agree and I will remove the victim's name from the lead. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:52, 13 April 2022 (UTC)