Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government

message: We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month,  will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of .
 
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
* The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
* The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
* The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to  for his original , and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of , and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular pages report 

message: Is this page on?  There's a ton of dead threads here, would people be opposed to auto-archiving? Power~enwiki (talk) 15:16, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto-archiving? 

message: Why are David J. Hickton and Roy C. Start in Category:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government and not in the sub-category  importance=low?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  David J. Hickton  and  Roy C. Start category? 

message: Hi, anybody hanging around who might know if this is Jake Zimmerman? Thank you for your time. :) Lotje (talk) 05:04, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jake Zimmerman]] 

message: Should the categories Ashkenazi Jews, German people of Jewish descent, Jewish atheists, Jewish philosophers, Jewish socialists, Jewish sociologists be added to this article?Talk:Karl_Marx#RfC RolandR (talk) 11:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC at [[Karl Marx]] 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Gillian Keegan#Photo under wrong licence at commons. --  Marchjuly (talk) 03:19, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[Gillian Keegan#Photo under wrong licence at commons]]

message: ...here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional input needed...

message: I nominated Andrew Jackson for GAN, but it has been stuck there for approximately 4 months will no-one yet volunteering to review it. My plan was to take it to FAC after it became a good article. However, I'm starting to think that the article is in good enough condition that I might be able to take it straight to FAC without having to wait for somebody to do an FA review on it. I would appreciate it if someone took no more than a quick look through the article and gave me their opinion on whether or not it was ready. Thanks. Display name 99 (talk) 01:29, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrew Jackson 

message: There is a discussion on Talk:Margaret Sanger#I have reverted the edits of NightHeron, as I think they better be discussed first that failed to attract third-party comments. Your comments are welcome there! Request put down here, as it is listed s in the interest of this WikiProject. The Banner talk 23:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for assistance 

message: I've started WP:Good article reassessment/Roseanne Barr/1 and welcome input from others. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:17, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roseanne Barr GAR 

message: As the primary editor of Byron Brown, I am too close to the article to assess the propriety of these edits.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  3rd party eyes are necessary. 

message: Just curious is this person would satisfy :WP:NPOL. He doesn't appear to meet :WP:BIO, but maybe being the :New Mexico Commissioner of Public Lands is considered sufficient enough to establish notability? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Aubrey Dunn Jr.]] 

message: There is an RfC at the Sean Hannity article talk page members of this project might interested in taking part in here.  -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 17:17, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC notification

message: There is an RfC at the John Bolton article talk page members of this project might interested in taking part in 
here.  -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 01:30, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC Notification

message: One often sees "Independent" capitalized in Wikipedia articles, such as in the infobox at Bernie Sanders, as if it were the name of a party, like Democrat or Republican. Because there is no party, it should never be capitalized except where other common nouns would normally be capitalized, e.g. at the beginning of a sentence. This is consistent with the usage of the word in Independent politician. If "independent" isn't capitalized in the infobox, should a person's party affiliation be abbreviated similarly, e.g. Bernie Sanders (i)?
I would appreciate receiving consensus on this matter, so that I and other editors will have a basis for capitalization or not. Perhaps we could start with whether this edit was an appropriate one. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 18:03, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stylistic question about capitalization of "independent" in an infobox 

message: Users may be interested in this AfD Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_R._Holmes. Polyamorph (talk) 19:41, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  John R. Holmes 

message: There is an RfC at the Roseanne Barr talk page found here that members of this project might be interested in taking part in. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 01:53, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC at Roseanne Barr

message: You are invited to join the discussion at talk:Donald Trump#RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?.  - MrX 🖋 18:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[talk:Donald Trump#RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?]]

message: There are a number of unresolved reference problems on Winston Churchill. Please see the thread at Talk:Winston Churchill#Sources. Your attention would be appreciated. DuncanHill (talk) 15:37, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winston Churchill - reference probems 

message: Hello! I am becoming concerned the Jim Jordan article is becoming overburden with edits regarding an on-going sexual harassment investigation at Ohio State dating from 1980s and 1990s. I believe the a section fails WP:NPOV and WP:TMI. The section of the article needs an expert with a neutral point of view that doesn't go overboard with too much information. FunksBrother (talk) 02:18, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jim Jordan (American politician)|Jim Jordan]] 

message: There is an RfC at the Ron DeSantis talk page found here that members of this project might interested in taking part in.  -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 16:12, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC on Ron DeSantis "monkey" quote

message: I recently came across the article Sean Tevis, about a notable (unsuccessful) political candidate from Kansas a decade ago.  I updated a lot of it to the correct tense and to reflect a more encyclopedic, less newsy approach.  However, there was one detail I wasn't able to pin down: Tevis's campaign drew a huge number of small donations, and that led to a bill proposed in the KS legislature that would have required candidates with large numbers of donors to report their names and addresses.  The thing is, I can't figure out what happened to this bill: was it ever voted on?  did it pass?  is it law?  (See here for what I did find.)  Can anyone help?  (Cross-posted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kansas.)  Thanks, JBL (talk) 13:05, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Sean Tevis]] 

message: Should we add the successors of incumbents like this edit? Corky 16:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just that article... it's :Kevin Yoder, :Heidi Heitkamp, Dennis Ross, :Mike Capuano, :Rod Blum, :Jim Renacci, :John Hickenlooper, etc. Do I need to go on? I used Colyer as an example because he's the current governor of my state. Corky 17:35, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

text: Never mind the fact that this is part of the same tired old post-election spam that's been dumped on the encyclopedia every two years for quite some time now.  As I've pointed out in one such discussion, we appear to have editors content to push the POV that getting elected is all that matters to our coverage of an individual and that their swearing-in is a mere formality.  It's quite possible to dig up a RS which explicitly states as much, but are those individual sources "minority viewpoints" as described in WP:UNDUE?  There's also a related issue, where numerous corners of the encyclopedia portray state legislators whose terms actually begin and end in January of odd-numbered years as having their terms begin or end in even-numbered years.  This appears to fall in line with the same POV and are often backed by the same type of news media sources. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  02:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

text: Also, I decided to click on one of the links provided by Corky, in this case the Hickenlooper article (No relation to Bourke Hickenlooper?  Damn.).  I noticed the successor-elect in the infobox.  I also noticed that everything else in the article pertaining to 2018 is already outdated.  This reveals another POV, namely the thought that we need only be concerned with the infobox because nobody really reads articles anymore. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  07:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC: Successor-elects in the infobox 

message: #We've been doing it this way for years. Why change now? GoodDay (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support 

message: # per my discussion :Talk:Jeff Colyer#Putting successor in infobox. We have  listed a successor until they have officially taken office, just like Obama's infobox didn't list Trump until January 20, 2017.  has added the successors to a majority of the infoboxes for incumbents, yet, when reverted, they revert again despite there being no consensus. The purpose of this RFC is to obtain a consensus. Corky 16:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oppose 

message: Jumping to an RfC in response to a single edit is ridiculous -- there has not been any discussion on that article talk page yet, even!  --JBL (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just that article... it's :Kevin Yoder, :Heidi Heitkamp, Dennis Ross, :Mike Capuano, :Rod Blum, :Jim Renacci, :John Hickenlooper, etc. Do I need to go on? I used Colyer as an example because he's the current governor of my state. Corky 17:35, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

text: Never mind the fact that this is part of the same tired old post-election spam that's been dumped on the encyclopedia every two years for quite some time now.  As I've pointed out in one such discussion, we appear to have editors content to push the POV that getting elected is all that matters to our coverage of an individual and that their swearing-in is a mere formality.  It's quite possible to dig up a RS which explicitly states as much, but are those individual sources "minority viewpoints" as described in WP:UNDUE?  There's also a related issue, where numerous corners of the encyclopedia portray state legislators whose terms actually begin and end in January of odd-numbered years as having their terms begin or end in even-numbered years.  This appears to fall in line with the same POV and are often backed by the same type of news media sources. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  02:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

text: Also, I decided to click on one of the links provided by Corky, in this case the Hickenlooper article (No relation to Bourke Hickenlooper?  Damn.).  I noticed the successor-elect in the infobox.  I also noticed that everything else in the article pertaining to 2018 is already outdated.  This reveals another POV, namely the thought that we need only be concerned with the infobox because nobody really reads articles anymore. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  07:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: As mentioned above, articles of losing candidates may not be updated after an election. (Articles like  Kara Eastman that turn into redirects are not a problem; articles of losing incumbents are.) Perhaps it makes sense to create a small wikiproject for elections, to add one simple sentence and link, if needed, to articles of election losers if previous editors have now lost interest. HouseOfChange (talk) 15:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: The more general problem of losing candidates' articles

message: Hello! If possible, I would like some input in the "Lead" thread. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Catalina Cruz (politician)]] 

message: Scott Smith (American politician), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.  « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @  18:28, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Scott Smith (American politician)]] GAR 

message: This page certainly is a WP:PROMO for Harris, and given how its written and the unusual amount of photos for someone of his notability it could also be a case of WP:AUTOBIO. I should also note that the author of the page has only contributed to this single article and that Harris himself has admitted to editing Wikipedia to boost the profile of his clients. Wondering what other editors' opinion on this article is and whether or not it should be nominated for deletion. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible AfD and almost certain COI- [[Vincent Harris (political strategist)]] 

message: It seems that there's no consensus/guideline on the general layout/structure of biographical series/sidebar for politicians/officeholders yet. e.g. , . —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 02:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus on the "series/sidebar" layout for politicians/officeholders 

message: Editors with concern about the encyclopedic integrity of WP, and the credibility of our project as a historical resource should review Ferdinand Marcos, and especially the first sentence of the lead section in regard the the word "Kleptocrat".  While I don't doubt his corruption, this seems like an odd term and POV, being pushed by narrow and local political agenda.  Cheers! --Kevin Murray (talk) 09:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Ferdinand Marcos]]

message: Could someone from this WikiProject take a look at :Azarias Ruberwa? Someone claiming to be Ruberwa's social media manager has recently been editing the article, so it might be a good idea for some others to go over the edits and make sure they are in line with relevant policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:29, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Azarias Ruberwa]] 

message: A discussion is taking place as to whether :Portal:Donald Trump is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Donald Trump until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 11:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination of [[:Portal:Donald Trump]] for deletion 

message: A discussion is taking place as to whether :Portal:Barack Obama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Barack Obama until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 11:17, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination of [[:Portal:Barack Obama]] for deletion 

message: Hi All, first-time poster here. Just a quick suggestion. How do people feel about modifying the infoboxes of all (most) MP's to show their position on Brexit? A lot of the time when people want to know something about an MP, chances are, they want to know what their Brexit position is. At the moment, there is no clear way to tell what their views are on Brexit without scanning through parts of their bio. To me, at least, it just appears easier to have a simple field in their Infobox describing this. --Spacejunkjim (talk) 11:05, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP Brexit Position in Infobox 

message: A request for comment regarding a rape allegation against Bill Shorten, an Australian politician, may be of interest to editors in this WikiProject. – Teratix ₵ 02:34, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC of possible interest 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Adi Laufitu Malani#Requested move 3 October 2019. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:05, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[Talk:Adi Laufitu Malani#Requested move 3 October 2019]]

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool 

message: This article could use some attention from someone who's better acquainted with bios of politicians than I am. Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 11:16, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Benard Odoh]] 

message: Please see: .
The article (on a somewhat controversial biography of Abraham Lincoln) rarely has editors or even talk-page comments, so additional input is requested.  PoV issues with our article have been pointed out since 2009, and the off-site academic controversy involving the book's notable author, Lerone Bennett Jr., and his views about Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation goes back to the 1960s.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:01, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balance at ''[[Forced into Glory]]'' 

message: Judy Sheindlin, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Nole (chat·edits) 21:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judge Judy GAR 

message: Please see here: Talk:David Clarke (sheriff)#RfC on political party. Your opinion is appreciated. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 01:08, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on political party of David Clarke (sheriff) 

message: I am currently working on creating an article for the current Dallas County Judge, Clay Jenkins. Feel free to help out!  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 05:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:Clay Jenkins]] 

message: Joe Biden, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joe Biden 

message: I have serious problems with User:Bnguyen1114's work on this and other article. They managed to increase the article size by 50%, and after I reverted part of their edits, they are now back at it, aiming maybe for 300k. Problems are laid out in edit summaries and on their talk page. In essence, it's excessive detail and the sourcing was problematic. Now they're adding secondary sourcing, but that was only part of the problem. Your assistance is appreciated. Drmies (talk) 18:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Kamala Harris]]

message: Was wondering if someone from this task for could take a look at this article? The creator has been blocked per :WP:SOCK and the article has been tagged for speedy deletion per :WP:G5. The subject might meet :WP:NPOL; so, if someone feels the article should be kept，they will need to move quickly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:48, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:O.P.S Bhadoria]] 

message: Could someone look at the content issues there? Needs more discussion. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Jenny_Durkan#Deletion_of_controversies]] 

message: Right now, the Chris Mullin page automatically leads to the basketball player - at the same time, there is a Chris Mullin (politician) - the one who led the fight to release the Birmingham Six and vote A Very British Coup (which was adapted to a TV series).
I've started a discussion on the talk page there, requesting to rename the basketball player page to Chris Mullin (basketball), and make the Chris Mullin page a disambiguation page with equal representation to both of them.
Arguments raised against my proposal:
* The basketball player has more views.
My main argument for the move:
* The basketball player gets most of his views from the US, while outside the US he's hardly known, and in Britain itself the politician-author Chris Mullin is much better known.
I invite you guys to take part in the discussion.
The link:
Talk:Chris Mullin#Requested move 22 August_2020. 
Thank you! Maxim.il89 (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: Debate on creating a Chris Mullin disambiguation page (now it automatically leads to the basketball player) 

message: I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 20:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC about the ways to discuss Margot's gender identity 

message: I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 23:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC about Nikolai Lukashenko 

message: There have been multiple conflicting edits on the pages of many government officials, particularly United States judges, concerning the display of their honorary prefix (The Honorable). There seems to be a vague or split consensus on this issue, so here is the opportunity to state if you support displaying prefixes for American officials or not. Hopefully, a consensus can be reached, so please, discuss. ~ Fluffy89502 (talk) 01:35, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style (Honorary Prefixes & Suffixes) 

message: This individual has become a major political figure in Texas and around the Country, but the article is in need of additional peer reviews and revisions.  Please consider contributing and/or reviewing for approval. BostickLaw (talk) 15:16, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review Request - [[Draft:Christopher Hollins]] 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 November 11 § File:Elbegdorj.JPG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:36, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 November 11#File:Elbegdorj.JPG|Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 November 11 §&nbsp;File:Elbegdorj.JPG]]

message: An RfC is occurring at  that concerns the inclusion of succession boxes in articles about US presidents. The RfC's outcome may have implications for the future of succession boxes more generally. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the village pump. Thank you. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 07:57, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on succession boxes on US presidential biographies (and the future of succession boxes) 

message: Can you guys add the rest of the local politicians. ArekSmith (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding the rest of the local politicians

message: I am looking for some help with Monroe Hayward. He died before taking the oath of office for the Senate, so I don't think it is accurate to say that he served a term in the infobox, or even to say that he was a Senator. At the same time, he indeed was the Senator-elect, so there should be something there. I am taking a look at the template used here, Template:Infobox officeholder, and I can't see a parameter that would be very helpful. (There is a parameter for people like President-elect, but that seems to be for people that will take office in the future. He's dead, so no help there.) Maybe it shouldn't be changed. It's a low-traffic page and this is relatively minor, so it's not a big deal, but it does bug me. Any thoughts or direction? DoomLexus (talk) 00:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox for Senator that never took office 

message: Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 03:45, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination for merging of [[Template:Infobox member of the Knesset]] 

message: I'm trying to get Huey Long up to FA status. It's been through GA, a peer review, and a FAN. Any general tips or advice on how I could improve it? Are any sections still too detailed or given undue weight? Don't worry about grammar - it's about to receive a ce from the guild. Thanks! ~ HAL333 02:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any input appreciated 

message: See here for RFC concerning succession boxes in bios of US political bios. GoodDay (talk) 04:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC at WP:POLITICS, concerning succession boxes 

message: There's an ongoing discussion at Talk:Jamie Raskin about the title of his "Early life" section, the position of his "Publications" section, and ownership of the article in general. I think some outside voices might be helpful at this point. I don't have a strong opinion about it, I think "Publications" generally go at the end of articles, but mostly I would like the editwarring to stop. Raskin's article has seen a significant uptick in traffic this week due to his involvement in the impeachment.-- Patrick, oѺ∞ 00:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jamie Raskin section editwar 

message: Hugo Black, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA reassessment for [[Hugo Black]] 

message: Hello, there's a discussion going on about removing an honorific from the Infobox at Augusto Pinochet. Your feedback would be appreciated at Talk:Augusto Pinochet#Honorific in Infobox. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback requested at Augusto Pinochet 

message: I have nominated Charles Edward Magoon for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. RetiredDuke (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles Edward Magoon at FAR 

message: Jon Corzine, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Jon Corzine Good Article Reassessment

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 July 14 § File:Jo Grimond.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 July 14#File:Jo Grimond.jpg|Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 July 14 §&nbsp;File:Jo Grimond.jpg]]

message: *Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Presidents#Survey (Question 1 - president series boxes) with Discussion of president series boxes, 
*Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Presidents#Survey (Question 2 - vice-president series boxes) with Discussion of vice-president series boxes. Shearonink (talk) 22:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: RfCs of interest

message: I have nominated Malcolm X for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 16:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Notice of Featured Article Review

message: The following succession boxes were removed from the page for Mike Pence a while back:
Most other such officeholders have these types of party succession boxes. Should they be included?2601:241:300:B610:1D96:C3A3:A6E9:FDB4 (talk) 04:53, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Party succession boxes. 

message: I have nominated Ramón Emeterio Betances for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 02:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Notice of Featured Article Review

message: See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bernie_Sanders#Merge_Media_coverage_of_Bernie_Sanders_into_Bernie_Sanders Yleventa2 (talk) 19:06, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have proposed merging Media coverage of Bernie Sanders into Bernie Sanders 

message: I have nominated William Henry Harrison for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Sahaib3005 (talk) 17:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR notice 

message: If somebody is elected an MP, and held the constituency for twenty years but never once addressed parliament, does that make them a politician? Does it warrant mention in the infobox and lead, or just in the body text? Please discuss at Talk:Daniel Gooch#MP. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP for twenty years, but never spoke in Parliament: politician, yes or no 

message: Is it appropriate to put "status=Expelled" in the Officeholder infobox of an elected official whose term is not yet over but they have been expelled from the body they were serving on? Please comment at Talk:Chaim Deutsch. GA-RT-22 (talk) 15:27, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expelled status in infobox? 

message: Alan Keyes has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment of Alan Keyes 

message: I'll likely propose a project for a project on Congressional slaveholders as something to do for Black History Month based on data recently released by The Washington Post.  My early draft of the proposal is at The Signpost newsroom, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Black History Month
I'm also working on the format of a possible list article User:Smallbones/List of U.S. congressional slaveholders
If anybody wants to help or comment please contact me on my talk page or via email. Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:06, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congressional slaveholder mini-project 

message: I have initiated an RfC on an editor's claim about a source he's using to declare 25+ individuals "Founding Fathers". So far, the RfC has generated input from just a couple editors - most of the comments are from me and the other editor. I would appreciate feedback from others. The relevance regarding WP Biographies is that the source in question is being used to add "Founding Father" to the biographies of the individuals in question with scant support from other sources.
On issue two, I am looking for a project that's focused on America's founding. Most of the biographies I mentioned above are in need of work, and while I'm perfectly willing to do substantial research and writing, collaboration is needed because of the size of this endeavor (upwards of 200 biographical articles) and then its importance to an understanding of the nation's beginnings.
Any and all feedback on the above would be most appreciated. Allreet (talk) 17:09, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The link to the RfC: Request for comment on use of sources Allreet (talk) 17:14, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two issues: RfC on use of sources and looking for a project on the Revolution/U.S. Founding 

message: I have nominated Wesley Clark for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for [[Wesley Clark]] 

message: A request for comment that may interest members of this project has been opened at . ––Formal talk 19:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC notification 

message: I'm notifying the wikiproject of an article in need of help here: . I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 09:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:UNDUE and sourcing issues. 

message: I have nominated Andrew Jackson for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. FinnV3 (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Review: Andrew Jackson 

message: An editor has asked for a Move review of :Frank Mrvan. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. 
-- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 06:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Move review for [[:Frank Mrvan]]

message: I have nominated Jefferson Davis for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Guerillero Parlez Moi 13:16, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jefferson Davis FAR 

message: There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Jefferson Davis/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  23:04, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Save Award for [[Jefferson Davis]] 

message: A brief bio of a now dead politician still has a bio template on it. I opened a discussion, but someone here might want to be BOLD? LessHeard vanU (talk) 17:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raymond A. Harris 

message: There is a Request for Comment at  that may interest members of this WikiProject. Please participate at the talk page. ––Formal (talk) 07:50, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment about [[Kari Lake]] 

message: Just wondering about creating infoboxes for members of the house of councillors. some are members of multi member districts but not STV. Im wondering what to put as the predecessors and successors for that politician TheHaloVeteran2 (talk) 16:20, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  House of Councillors NSTV 

message: I have nominated Andry Rajoelina for GA Reassessment here if you want to participate then please do. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Andry Rajoelina]]

message: Zachary Taylor has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: GAR notice

message: Mauricio Macri has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. SeeAlsoPolice (talk) 22:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment of Mauricio Macri 

message: At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists#Category:Lists of heads of state I raised some issues about many "lists of heads of state / rulers / leaders of country X". Because :Category:Heads of state is within the scope of the Politics and government work group, some of you here might have valuable imput about how to solve these issues. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: PS: After some further reading and thinking, I came to the conclusion to nominate the :Category:Rulers as a whole for deletion: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 4#Category:Rulers. I think this will be an important step towards solving many of the issues I have outlined. Your participation in the discussion would be appreciated. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Lists of heads of state]] 

message: I have nominated Sherman Minton for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sherman Minton Featured article review 

message: Is there a more specific page about notability criteria for this than WP:Notability (people) - draft written by AlreadyYeti - does it meet notability criteria? - (I am a new draft reviewer and this is not my strong topic area) Thanks Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 23:25, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does [[Draft:Sam Lawrence (Ohio Politician)]] meet notability criteria 

message: Hi all
I'm interested in showing the donors to UK MPs and wondering if there is a standardised way of doing this beyond having a section called funders or something? Is there a recognised way to include this in the infoboxes?
Thanks
John Cummings (talk) 11:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a standardised way of showing donors to politicians in their articles? 

message: A discussion which may be of interest to the members of this group can be found here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion of interest

message: Hi everyone - I'm wondering if publications on biographical pages of living individuals should be listed in a reverse chronological or chronological order? Thanks! W9793 (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question re listing of publications 

message: I have nominated Lawrence Sullivan Ross for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dylanvt (talk) 13:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article review 

message: The other day I was on the page for Ash Regan and noticed her short desc was "Alba Party politician", which struck me as oddly specific, so I changed that to simply "Scottish politician" — following what I'd come to expect. But as I looked around more British politican pages, this doesn't seem to be the template at all.
Looking at the other SNP MSPs and clicking at random, backbenchers have "Scottish National Party politician", and cabinet ministers give their specific portfolio (eg: Angela Constance). It's not limited to the SNP and Scotland, either: Gavin Williamson is a "British Conservative poltician", Penny Mordaunt is "Leader of the UK House of Commons since 2022", David Lammy is "Shadow Foreign Secretary", and so on. (There are some who are just "British politician" — Michael Gove — but they are the rare exception.)
The thing is, I don't see this level of specificity elsewhere. I edit in the Canadian politics realm a lot, and Canadian politicians are always "Canadian politician", aside from heads of state — no partisan affiliation, no portfolio. I'm less familiar with Australia or New Zealand, but clicking through members of the Albanese ministry or Sixth Labour Government of New Zealand, I only ever see "Australian politician" or "New Zealand politician" (with the single exception of Penny Wong, for some reason…). So why are the UK short descs like this? Is there a consensus to do it this way?
A simple "[country] politician" description would certainly seem preferable, since it requires less maintenance (not having to edit it when someone changes parties, or gets shuffled to a new portfolio, etc). So should the UK bios be changed accordingly? I don't mean to suggest this is the most pressing issue and that we all need to chip in to fix it, or even that I'm about to go on a crusade changing them all, but I still think it'd be good to see where the community stands on this. — Kawnhr (talk) 23:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why do British politicians have such long short descriptions? 

message: Early life of Jan Smuts has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 08:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Early life of Jan Smuts]] 

message: There is an RfC occurring concerning the lede and whether Lévesque should be refered to as "Canadian politician" or a Québécois politician.-- Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[René Lévesque]] RfC about lede 

message: Hi all. Just over from the Cricket Project. The above Conservative MP, who once tried to get a vote of no confidence against Churchill during WWII, also briefly played first-class cricket in India. I have recently expanded his article, but wouldn't mind trying to get him up toward GA (think FA might be a stretch). I've probably exhausted his cricket endeavours, and largely the same for his pre-politics career in India, but wondered if anyone would have a look at his political career and possibly be able to expand it? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 17:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[John Wardlaw-Milne]] 

message: Francis Bok has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Francis Bok]] 

message: There's currently an RfC at Talk:Fani Willis#RFC: alleged misuse of funds about whether allegations from a former employee of Fani Willis should be covered in the article. Editors are invited to participate. TarnishedPathtalk 10:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Fani Willis#RFC: alleged misuse of funds]] 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Zog I of Albania#Requested move 14 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 01:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Zog I of Albania#Requested move 14 March 2024]] 

message: Ronald M. George has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 11:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Ronald M. George]] 

message: :Category:American politicians who are the most recent member of their party to hold statewide office has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. 1Matt20 (talk) 16:21, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:American politicians who are the most recent member of their party to hold statewide office]] has been nominated for discussion

message: Categories of socialists of various types & countries seem to have the highest, yet splotchy, application of  (e.g. Christian, Democratic, American, ...), while other orientations have almost no tags for politics and government. Other affirmative examples include Nationalists by nationality & Neo-fascists. Is this lack of  purposeful, or an omission? In other words, should  be added to most :Category:People by political orientation subcats, or should it generally be removed from them?   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  21:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: pinging frequent & careful taggers for input.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  16:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not familiar with past discussions regarding |politician-work-group=yes or with the meaning of all of the subcategories in :Category:People by political orientation but I would say there are benefits to categorizing with WikiProject Biography and at least one work group (for statistics and just "biography" is too broad). I've been tagging mostly politician categories with this work group but it seems appropriate to me, reading the introduction of Politics, to also categorize these categories with this work group. Anyone interested in editing articles regarding political orientation, politics and government can then focus on articles/categories tagged with that work group. Simeon (talk) 17:11, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: What Simeon has written resonates with me. I'm fine with it being included for the reasons they've written. My own working approach has been to ask for whether the person is active in politics (or activism that's really tailored toward politics/government), as opposed to it as an identity. But I don't have strong feelings in either excluding or including. Mason (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category tagging for [[:Category:People by political orientation]]