Talk:2017–18 United States political sexual scandals

Organization?
Should this be organized by political party? While I wouldn't exactly call it a bias method, I think it would be safer to organize it by date, such as in List of federal political sex scandals in the United States (obviously by month, rather than year). Xevus11 (talk) 20:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Roy Moore
Is Roy Moore not a political figure accused child predator TheThomas (talk) 02:00, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 8 December 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. While there are legitimate concerns about the current title, the consensus was not in favor of the proposed move. (non-admin closure) James (talk/contribs) 19:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

2017 United States political sexual scandals → 2017 sexual harassment scandals – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Booksnarky (talk) 05:31, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * My rationale, the current title is unwieldy. 'United States' is improperly limiting. 'Political' is also unncessarily, and inaccurately limiting. The general idea seems to be 'sexual harassment' and thats the standard term, and it works here. -Booksnarky (talk) 05:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the word scandal is inappropriate and doesn't meet Wikipedia's naming policy (see WP:POVNAMING). I'd agree that it might make sense to merge this, the Me Too (hashtag) and Weinstein effect pages into one. As as been discussed in depth on those other two pages' talk pages, in the context of ongoing news reporting and the varying degrees of alleged misconduct and source reliability, whichever direction the community decides to go with this, it's important that BLP issues are treated appropriately and with care. Kb.au (talk) 06:23, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * 'Scandal' is commonly used for a title, and consensus seems to agree that its not POV. Whether it violates NPOV or not would be an issue for Arbcom to rule on, if it was that disagreements were excessive. BLP caution as valid issue and also as problematic scarecrow are both legitimate ways to regard BLP topics, but just the job here is simple, to report what's been printed in media. -Booksnarky (talk) 07:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as it is. Nothing wrong with the article at all. There is a separate article already for the UK political sexual scandals in 2017, so there should be one for the USA aswell. Furthermore i'm concerned that the editor Booksnarky may be a sock puppet since for a brand new editor he knows alot about 'requested moves' as well as wikipedia rules. JimmyJoe87 (talk) 09:00, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, the term 'sexual scandals' covers a broad scope from sexual harassment to sexual assault, whereas moving to 'sexual harassment scandals' means many of the celebrities who have been accused of rape, assault etc would not be included since that is not sexual harassment but something more. JimmyJoe87 (talk) 09:06, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose / keep as it is. It's an important enough topic that it deserves its own page. The political scandals are prominent and have amassed wide mainstream coverage this year, and have enough material and sources to support their own page. Paintspot Infez (talk) 13:21, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose any mention of 2017 There are 17 days left in this year, and Donald Trump isn't even close to being paraded naked through the streets by a devout septa. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Merge of "Me too (hashtag)" article
The Me Too (hashtag) article was started long before this one. I could see Me Too (hashtag) being linked within this article's prose, but I don't support a merge into this one. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 23:46, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Recent events???
'''This article or section appears to be slanted towards recent events. (December 2017)'''

The article title says it is about 2017 scandals, so this tag is saying the obvious, it is slated towards recent events.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Extending into 2018?
A few of these allegations seem to have happened in 2018. This shouldn't be that surprising because quite a few of the allegations came out in December 2017. Should we extend the article's title to include 2018 scandals? FallingGravity 07:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Extending into 2019 and beyond?
As it is nearly Xmas and people in high places are still having sex, should we move this to United States political sexual scandals During the Trump administration or just start a new article for 2019-20?Arglebargle79 (talk) 14:00, 21 December 2018 (UTC) :Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppet of Ericl Johnsagent (talk) 18:53, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * For that matter, why don't we extend it both forward and backward to include 2019 and the years before 2017? I see their is a category:state and local political sex scandals in the United States, but no article.Johnsagent (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Inclusion of alleged Donald Trump-Stormy Daniels affair
I noticed there's been a slow edit war over whether or not Trump's alleged affair with Stormy Daniels should be included. As the one who originally added this material, I believe this is within the article's scope. For one thing, it appears to cover allegations against American politicians near the end of 2017 and near the beginning of 2018 (right now it seems these scandals have mostly tempered down). The alleged extra-marital affair and subsequent hush money is definitely a scandal, even if you don't believe it actually happened (the same could be said about all the accusations listed here). FallingGravity 20:26, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support inclusion. WP:PUBLICFIGURE applies. -- BullRangifer (talk) 21:09, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I too support inclusion of Daniels. An article that states 2017-2018 should include all of 2017 and all of 2018.Johnsagent (talk) 05:28, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Keith Ellison
Keith Ellison is listed as a "state official;" he is actually a United States Representative from the 5th congressional district of Minnesota and should properly be listed as a federal official. Thanks! 21:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.10.165.90 (talk)
 * ✅ --DannyS712 (talk) 00:57, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Brett Kavanaugh?
I think you all know what’s going on with him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.180.75 (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Not sure who wrote this, but including guilty by association is silly. If you pull the whole guilty by association thing, we will be listing out everyone in Congress. Stick to the facts of the allegations, not fallacies. Ramirez accused Kavanaugh of indecent exposure, NOT sexual assault and Ford accused him of sexual assault. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.34.54 (talk) 20:55, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned references in 2017–18 United States political sexual scandals
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of 2017–18 United States political sexual scandals's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "resign": From Frank Artiles:  From List of American state and local politicians convicted of crimes:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 20 January 2019 (UTC)