Talk:Women in the United States Senate

message: Could the list of female senators could be turned into a timeline, like List of popes (graphical)?  I think this would illustrate rather well the gaps, when there were concurrent female senators, and the recent upsurge in female representation. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline

message: "Religion" (like other personal information such as "marital status", "physical disabilities", and "sexual orientation"), is inappropriate to include in the context of professional information such as "party affiliation" and "education".  Personal information is appropriately included in individual biographies. 
Paravani (talk) 22:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion

message: I think this article would be a good candidate for FL --192.8.222.82 (talk) 13:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: FL nominate

message: An anonymous editor keeps changing the caption on the group photo to make Barbara Mikulski into a middle row. I think the previous caption, which put her in the front row (you know, where she is standing) was quite understandable. What the editor has failed to take into account is that if you look for a middle row, you will not find one. -Rrius (talk) 06:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Having checked the IP's contributions, which included a reference to Sen. Mikulski's height in the first sentence of the lead of her article, I no longer believe this a good faith edit. -Rrius (talk) 06:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

text: I think the photo has been reverted to an earlier one. Either way, the caption definitely doesn't match the picture. I'll check the article history and see if I can figure it out. Qqqqqq (talk) 01:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I just got so caught up in trying to get the caption right (Gillibrand and Landrieu looked too similar at that resolution) that I forgot to change the file name. -Rrius (talk) 01:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Group photo caption 

message: Does anyone else find the sentence "In 2006, Claire McCaskill (D-MO) became the third by defeating Senator Jim Talent" to be an inappropriate and unnecessary addition to the section titled "Firsts and Onlys"? It is neither a first, nor an only. I am removing it. If there is strong desire to keep it, the title of the subsection should be changed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.206.235 (talk) 19:10, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Firsts and Onlys 

message: For people who follow the women's movement, the reference to Clarence Thomas. which I removed, might be very clear. But to the non-clued-in person who reads this article for enlightenment, the reference was totally meaningless. If the reference is to be used, then it should be cited to reliable sources. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is the reliable source, which is given in the Year of the Woman article. Victor Victoria (talk) 21:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarence Thomas 

message: Olympia Snowe resigned in protest of GOP policies nearly a year ago. The page needs to be changed to reflect that. Common knowledge doesn't require citation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.191.37.180 (talk) 13:15, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect info on Olympia Snowe. 

message: Carol Moseley Braun (D-IL) currently holds the title of being the first and only female African-American U.S. Senator to serve in the U.S. Senate. LeahBethM (talk) 05:46, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carol Moseley Braun (D-IL) should be added to the 'Firsts and onlies' section  

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: There is an awful lot of unsourced material. The article has been tagged. (Original research?) 74.67.45.185 (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: The point of portraits in the article is to give the reader an idea of the senators' appearance.  A photo that shows, for example, a relatively close view of Kelly Ayotte's face is more effective in achieving that than one in which her face is but a small component of a photo showing her full torso and her hands resting on her knee.  I don't know who cropped the photos in March, and had gotten so used to them that I had forgotten how the photos had looked before then.  I think that portraits in similar articles focus on the legislator's face, and question why, in an article about female senators, it is so important to show their bodies.  
Could someone explain what's wrong with the cropped photos?  Unless there's a consensus in favor of showing full torsos, I think that the article should keep portraits that focus on the face of each senator. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portraits 

message: I see in list of female senators, it says RLF served for 49 days, but I thought she only served one day. NathanBru (talk) 23:32, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: from the time of her appointment to the time of the swearing in of the subsequent senator was 49 days, but the Senate was only actually in session for one day during that period, which is why she is considered to only have “served” for one day Griffindaly (talk) 20:48, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebecca Larimer Felton