Talk:Jill Stein 2016 presidential campaign

Page move request
Want to move this to Jill Stein presidential campaign, 2016 but page already exists

I've moved the page for you to the correct location. Nick (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

platform
I see that someone has copied her platform from her campaign website twice and both times its been wiped as per wp:copyvio. Surely though to copy from a website that has the sole purpose of getting her message out this is a time when it would be ok to copy? Eleutherius (talk) 20:36, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

biography page / 2016 platform
Jill Stein's biography page has a number of issues from her platform that would perhaps be better suited to this page. (This has often been the consensus view for removing text from the biography page.) However, no context has yet been made with those who have worked on this page. I doubt that those focused on the recent smear campaign on vaccines and GMOs will seek to radically change this page (because the average Wikipedia user probably is happy to just look at the main biography page to get an idea of the candidate); but I thought that it would be helpful to point out that there is still a significant amount of material on the bio page that would probably be more appropriate here (as some who have also worked on this page have suggested). This morning I removed the systemic anti-Stein bias tag I had added to the bio page about a week ago. Though many may feel there are still biased (generally anti-Stein) statements on the page (as I do), I think it would be a mistake to continue to identify the page as anti-Stein, now that the gorilla comparison and other misleading statements have been removed. SashiRolls (talk) 12:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Ballot status
Why is the ballot status from previous elections included? Jill Stein was not even the candidate in 2008 and 2004. It is frankly irrelevant and belongs in the articles about previous campaigns. I will remove these unless someone has a good counterargument. 75.51.198.63 (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The relevance is frankly obvious: it makes explicit the progress the Green candidate makes in becoming elegible for the American voters. So please keep it there.Otto (talk) 13:04, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * But this article is only about the 2016 campaign, information about the historical progress of ballot status should go on the main Green Party page. I don't think it's relevant to have Information about the Green Party ballot status in 2004 with a different candidate. I agree with the removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:4011:1800:0:0:0:0:B (talk) 19:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course it should be removed; as others have said the information is irrelevant to the specific campaign. It belongs elsewhere. 75.172.223.49 (talk) 08:25, 24 October 2016 (UTC)