Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton/FAQ

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Q: Shouldn't the article title be Hillary Clinton, not Hillary Rodham Clinton?
A: This has been discussed many times, and subjected to formal Request for Moves twice, both times rejected. See here and here for those discussions.
Q: Where is the article or section that lists her controversies?
A: There isn't one. All controversial material is included in the normal biographical sections they occur in, in this article (including sometimes in footnotes) and in the various daughter articles. Having a separate "controversies" or "criticisms" article or section is considered a violation of WP:NPOV, WP:Content forking, and WP:Criticism. A special effort was undertaken to rid all 2008 presidential candidates' articles of such treatment — see here — and the same has been done for some other political figures' articles.
Q: This article is POV! It's biased {for, against} her! It reads like it was written by {her PR team, Republican hatchet men}!
A: Complaints of bias are taken seriously, but must be accompanied by very specific areas of concern or suggestions for change. Vague, general statements such as these are of no help to editors; we can't read your mind. Edits that stick on {{pov}} tags without detailed explanations in Talk will just be backed out.
Q: The section on her presidential campaign leaves out important recent developments. What gives?
A: The main article is very tight on space and the presidential campaign section is intentionally brief. The daughter article Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, 2008 has a much fuller treatment of the campaign and that is where most new additions should go.
Q: The "future election" tag should be at the top of the article.
A: No. This is a full biographical article which has been very stable; only a small percentage of the article deals with the campaign, and thus only the presidential campaign section needs that tag (as well as the entire campaign daughter article). The other 2008 presidential candidates' articles do this the same way.
Q: Something in the lead section doesn't have a footnote. I'm going to put a {{fact}} tag on it right now.
A: This article (like many others) uses the approach that there are no citations in the lead section, because everything in the lead is also found in the body of the article along with its citation.
Q: This article is long!
A: Yes.
Q: This article is good. [Well, every once in a while someone says this.] Why not submit it for WP:FA?
A: Tried and came up short in October 2007, see here. Was tried again in April/May 2008, failed again, see here. Third time lucky someday? Who knows. It has been WP:GA since June 2007.