Talk:Janet Napolitano
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Is she running?
If a woman is to be the next President of the United States, my pick is this woman and not Hillary Clinton. - Burger
- No clue. She hasn't announced anything. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 04:20, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oooh, I like Kathleen Sebelius too. I wouldn't mind if the next presidential race was just sexy women fighting it out with their beautiful minds. - Burger
Who is Napolitano's husband?
- Governor Napolitano is single. - Espia 20:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Governor Napolitano currently has a "partner" ( she's a lesie ) 72.161.107.2 02:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- You need to cite your sources on things like that 70.162.132.42 07:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1129494,00.html
--snip-- A lawyer, she first attracted national attention in 1991, when she represented Anita Hill in her sexual-harassment case against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas. --snip--
[edit] Elections Information
Why is the information about Governor Napolitano's upcoming re-election bid in her Wikipedia biography as well as in a separate article about her re-election bid? Shouldn't there be a simple link to her re-election bid in her biography instead of replicating the information? Just wondering. - Espia 20:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Trolls
Someone please clean up this page... there has been vandalism. (note end of paragraph 3 in "political career"). Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.87.112.2 (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Administration Policies section..
The first sentence in the "Administration Policies" section is a Glittering Generality that reads like a political ad, and needs sources. Also, no mention of her opposition to Prop. 200, or a number of other key points in her tenure as governor.
CaptnSpandex 19:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed, looks like it was written by a campaign manager or PR person. Want to work on it? --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 19:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I reworded that bit, and it is more neutral than it was so I removed the tag.--Gloriamarie 04:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
==Bias==. I live here in Phoenix and I genuinely like Janet, but please, this article reads like it was written by her campaign manager. Come on guys !!!! Fix this up. And one more thing there is absolutely no reason not to mention her lesbianism. Who cares!
[edit] Personal Life
I removed the section regarding Napolitano's personal life, because it's really of no consequence to this article and has rarely received attention in other media. It looks to me to also be an attempt to insert rumors about her sexuality into the article, which have been reverted many times previously. --JMurphy 18:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
The vital statistics of any public official, who makes decisions for the public as a whole, is relevant - regardless of how flattering or unflattering the facts may be. I have no idea what Ms. Naplitano’s sexual orientation is, and I don’t care, but omitting this information is negligent and prevents the public from making their own educated decisions. Please add this relevant information back into this article. Thank you, VWRANCH —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vwranch (talk • contribs) 22:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 2010 election
the 2010 election section is being placed here too early. One poll has been released and she did not commission it anyway. Napoliatano has made no indications that she will run and there are no articles other than that one independent poll to speculate that she will. Until she makes some kind of statement about the election it should be included in the election page only not here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.53.177.205 (talk) 21:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism
The Criticism section only discusses Colorado City-related issues, which really belong in a larger section on her policies as AG and governor/political reactions to them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.228.249 (talk) 00:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, it's really off key and out of place. Although I'm not exactly sure where it should go. Avador 21:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)