Talk:Kathy Hochul

Image update
There is a new photo for Gov. Hochul on the official New York government website. Are pictures from there fair game from copyright?--Jgtrevor (talk) 15:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2021 (2)
Requested change in all caps below:

She served as Lieutenant Governor of [NEW YORK] from (2015-2021), United States Representative from New York's 26th Congressional District (2011-2013), County Clerk of Erie County (2007-2011), Deputy County Clerk of Erie County (2003-2007), & Member of The Hamburg Town Board (1994-2007). Waive (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Lead fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Lower casing in infobox
A discussion at WP:AN is being held, which may affect this article's subject & its predecessors. Input would be provided. GoodDay (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Irish Catholic Descent?
What is Irish Catholic "descent"? Catholic is not an ancestry.... 021120x (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

RfC Infobox Image
Just wondering about some thoughts in terms of replacing the infobox image to one of Hochul in her current office (as Governor of NY). I found this one from April 2022. It looks good in quality and shows Governor Hochul whereas the infobox image is an outdated portrait (5 years) of Lieutenant Governor Hochul. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:06, 17 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Do it. I have no objection and I can't see anyone who is against it . Greenhighwayconstruction (talk) 00:46, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I object to it. How in the heck is that a better photo than her official photo? Her appearance hasn't changed much since then either 47.223.90.202 (talk) 13:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

lede needs to be fixed
The lede currently says "Hochul was defeated for reelection in 2012 by Chris Collins after the district's boundaries and demographics were changed in the decennial reapportionment process"

It should end after "Hocul was defeated for reelection in 2012 by Chris Collins."

Besides reading like sour grapes, nothing in the article reflects this. The only source cited, under the 2012 section, doesn't even mention gerrymandering or the leanings of the constituents. Seems like original research, in other words.2604:3D09:C77:4E00:C08A:4A0D:84D4:751 (talk) 17:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)


 * The body of this article (Kathy Hochul) says "The district was redrawn in a manner that caused it to be more heavily Republican." That sentence cites this source, which says "the district Hochul has represented since 2011 ... has been renumbered, redrawn and leans more Republican in the redistricting process." – Arms & Hearts (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2022
Hochul has not been certified as the next governor of NY and should not be publicized until the results are certified by NYS BOE 2600:1700:880:9E80:946D:DCD0:73B2:3E7C (talk) 06:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Not done, race was called by major networks. -- Mvqr (talk) 11:22, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Edits from 29 December 2022 regarding 4104-A
I've altered the edits regarding Senate Bill 4104-A as they violated WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. The sources may also need to be improved, as one of them appears to be a twitter image, but as a noob to editing I feel I would somehow mess them up. Might be worth keeping an eye on this article, especially if it's brigaded by emotional individuals from other websites. 2A00:23C7:F329:5D00:345B:141A:8ABC:DC9E (talk) 16:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

is there a navbox for Kathy Hochul?
most other governors have this. Do not want to duplicate work. Joco179 (talk) 14:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Bias in "Controversy" section
The "controversy" section of the article, which cites only Hochul's response to the Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel, seems to have been written with political bias. One could clearly argue that as the governor of the state with the largest Jewish population in the diaspora, her support of Israel was not at all "controversial," rendering this entire section unnecessary. Perhaps section title should be changed to "response to Hamas terror attacks" or "Israeli-Hamas War." Outheretryin (talk) 04:07, 17 October 2023 (UTC)


 * It was a recent addition and I have removed it. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Nothing wrong with it being recent (the event itself was!) Scientelensia (talk) 16:19, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It’s timing has no bearing on its lack of controversy though. My point stands. Outheretryin (talk) 16:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The timing suggests WP:RECENCY bias. If you want this article to have a section on Israel/Palestine issues, a thorough and holistic view of her past statements and congressional votes would be in order, not a focus on one comment made over the weekend. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The version that was added definitely had problems. In particular it framed Awad's response as being to Hochul's statements specifically, which isn't my reading of the source (he's responding to the general tone of the responses above rather than just Hochul - responses like those. We definitely can't use Awad's statement like that. --Aquillion (talk) 21:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Inclusion of Israel-Palestine conflict views under political views
Numerous sources have referenced Hochul's reactions to protests in support of Palestinians as “abhorrent and morally repugnant.” Sources on this include AP, NYT, WAPO and many others. Something was added on it, alongside reactions, but it was removed, per above. Should something be re-added on this, not in a controversy section, but under her political views? Iskandar323 (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Possibly we could have an Israel / Palestine subsection, but I feel that it would be important to avoid basing it on just this one source. Surely there are other sources we could use to flesh out her general views as well? The quote could be included as part of that but shouldn't be the entire section. This would also satisfy WP:SUSTAINED - even though obviously the quote is recent, we can establish the relevance of her views on the topic by having a bunch of coverage of it over an extended period of time. OTOH coverage of that quote is the only coverage of her position here then her views on that topic might not be significant enough to include. --Aquillion (talk) 21:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Plenty of sources exist covering numerous aspects of her engagement with the Israel/Palestine question: her visit to Israel (NYT, Politico, Jerusalem Post, etc.), her lobbying Congress for aid to Israel (Politico), her denunciation of pro-Palestine protests (Times Union, Independent, Politico). More than enough for a subsection, for which the version added by Iskandar323 would be a reasonable basis. Muboshgu is right to cite WP:CSECTION, but wrong to invoke WP:RECENT – avoiding recency bias doesn't mean avoiding any coverage of recent events, it means not allowing them to overwhelm historical content. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. So, based on this, could a section on her views be made or does her statements count as controversy in their own right? Scientelensia (talk) 12:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Controversy sections are rarely appropriate. A subsection under "Political views" would be the way to go. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thoughts on her recent comments? BinaryBrainBug (talk) 12:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Unable to edit this page
I was going to add a wikilink to this article, but was prevented from doing so since it appears to be locked from editing. Please fix this ridiculous situation! 98.123.38.211 (talk) 22:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:21st-century Roman Catholics
Kathy Hochul is an Irish Catholic 2600:4808:9C70:6600:91D:3238:EEAD:E651 (talk) 22:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)