Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hillary Clinton

Code for the WikiProject template
Greetings, per request here is the code for the WikiProject template. Its a very basic one and there is still a lot that could be added but this should get you started.

}}

Good luck! 96.255.237.170 (talk) 00:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I collapsed the code since it was so wide. Much appreciated! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem at all. Just let me know if you need anything else. 96.255.237.170 (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2015 (UTC)


 * It would probably be better to indicate that the articles are for the WikiProject, and not for the politician herself

to
 * ASSESSMENT_CAT     = Hillary Rodham Clinton articles
 * ASSESSMENT_CAT     = WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton articles
 * And perhaps add class-mask and importance-mask subpages, to support Portal,Project,Book,Template,Category,Redirect class-types and importance type "Bottom"
 * -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I hope I am putting these pieces together correctly. I seem to have set up the importance-class categories, but not yet the quality-class categories. It has been a while since I set up WikiProject infrastructure, so if anyone sees gaps or inconsistencies, feel free to add/correct! WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton/Assessment. Another Believer ( Talk ) 05:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there someone who is willing and able to assist with changing this template and its associated categories now that the Wikipedia article has moved from "Hillary Rodham Clinton" to "Hillary Clinton"? It would be nice if all project pages and categories were named consistently ("Hillary Clinton"). I am not an admin, so I can always nominate pages and categories for renaming, but I assume an admin could fix this quickly and easily. This would require updating the project banner commands as well. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:17, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Project Clinton
Wouldn't this be better if it covered both Bill and Hillary? "WP:WikiProject Hillary and Bill Clinton" -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Clinton dynasty? :p I was inspired to create this project by WikiProject Barack Obama, which clearly has a very narrow focus. It is possible this WikiProject will not gain enough traction to sustain itself, but Clinton is going to be in the headlines for a while and I think it would be beneficial to Wikipedia to have a place where people can focus on improving content about her specifically. If an active community forms here and there is consensus to add Bill to the scope of the project, I would not oppose, but for now I think a narrower scope is fine. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it is worth noting that the Barack Obama project also deals with the Barack Obama administration, and that it is, in a large way, kind of a subproject of WP:USPREZ. Unfortunately, Hillary is still only a candidate, and I think the Obama project was created after he won the presidency. There is a bit of a difference there. I could reasonably see a project on the Clintons, and maybe one on the 2016 US Presidential race, having more likely support than one on a single candidate. Also, I regret to say, having such narrow focus on only one, let me repeat, candidate, opens up the possibility of similar WikiProjects for, for instance, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, George Pataki, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Scott Walker, and, God help us Donald Trump. It could be argued that pretty much every one of them has done about as much of encyclopedic noteworthiness as Hillary. I might suggest renaming and refocusing the project to include all of the 2016 Presidential race, at least initially, and then have whoever wins have a separate project along the lines of the Obama project. Alternately, having one for Bill and Hillary, considering they were both active during his 8 year administration, might be more useful in the long run to wikipedia, particularly if Hillary's candidacy doesn't go far. John Carter (talk) 20:41, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I definitely see your point, but I would counter by saying that the Hillary Clinton category has over 60 articles. The same cannot be said for most, if not all, of the other candidates. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I seem to remember somewhere that we generally wanted at least 100 articles, real or potential, for a WikiProject to be really likely to succeed and be useful. Together, all the candidates would be likely to meet that number. And, like I said, there is also the possibility of a Clinton family WikiProject (the word "dynasty" seems to be jumping the gun a little), and/or a 2016 US Presidential Race WikiProject, which might be the best way to ensure real neutrality in our content. Any WikiProject devoted to one candidate, or even one party, is likely to face questions about POV and WEIGHT concerns regarding their topic in broader articles, while a project that deals with the broader topic from all sides is less likely to be potentially seen as being a POV pushing effort. John Carter (talk) 20:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * ("Dynasty" was a joke and a reference to a recent Saturday Night Live sketch.) Honestly, I totally see where you are coming from and I am not opposed if others agree and are interested in contributing to the project, whatever its scope may be. If others come along and express their desire for a WikiProject with a wider scope, great! But, at the same time, I am also fine with seeing if there is interest in a project with a narrow scope. Not sure how long it would take to determine that, though... --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:55, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Considering the amount of overlap between Bill and Hillary topics, a Rodham project will cover a lot of Jefferson territory, so it seems better to just double up at the start -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm also skeptical there's enough here to warrant a project. Including Bill would give it a better chance of achieving critical mass.  But even then, the history of most WP projects is that they have some initial activity and then gradually fizzle out.  In any case, note that there are two additional Hillary-related GA articles that you can put on the featured content list: White House travel office controversy and White House FBI files controversy.  Wasted Time R (talk) 11:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Where there is 60, there soon will be more than 100. Hilary Clinton is entitled to a Project, independent of her husband Bill. While he obviously supports her, she has created a completely separate political identity such that articles about her will expand to meet any minimum criteria. . Buster Seven   Talk  12:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I added these two GA articles to the project page. And I agree that many WikiProjects fizzle, but I think a WikiProject with Bill included is almost equally as likely to fade and certainly a WikiProject specific to the 2016 presidential election is ephemeral from the start. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Not useful at all. These are two distinct individuals with two distinct, lengthy, separate, and wide-ranging careers and lives. Softlavender (talk) 06:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Name
Just wondering, would you keep the current project name if the HRC article is renamed? --BDD (talk) 13:05, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I would move it to WP:Hillary Clinton. That is my preferred name, but I went with HRC because of the Wikipedia article. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Per the above section, it'd be better to call it Hillary and Bill or Bill and Hillary, because little of Hillary's history prior to being a senator is separate from Bill's. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Difference between categories and featured?
I am inquiring as to why there are these two sections with no clear definition. I initially thought that we would just compile a complete list of every page focusing on Hillary and put it here, but I'm not sure. Also, I'd like to know if there are other pages that this project will be focusing on other than what is listed here. Considering that only a few people have signed up so far, I think it imperative that we have a clearly defined goal of what is is we are going to do and how are we going about it. Do we have a step by step strategy of achieving this WikiProject's goals? I'm asking these things because I'm a little confused about how we are to begin, besides making the edits to articles pertaining to Hillary more often. - Ring of Frost (talk) 16:24, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I very much welcome you to add more articles/tasks to the main page and to define the project's goals, etc. The more input, the better. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:37, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, we can either just create a list of HRC-related article and display them on the project's main page, or we can create a talk page banner and use the assessment framework. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:34, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

"Hilary" with one "l" in articles around WP
Let me suggest that we incorporate into this project a regular review of potential errors in the spelling of Clinton's first name across Wikipedia. KConWiki (talk) 04:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Current Presidential Campaign vs. everything else
I don't think that the bolded section of the following statement should be part of the primary objectives of this project.

"'Ensure all articles pertaining to Clinton are constantly updated with the latest reliable information, especially in the case of her current presidential campaign.'"

Any thoughts on this? KConWiki (talk) 15:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is necessary. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Visible title discussion at the Hillary Clinton template
There is a discussion taking place on the talk page of her template navbox concerning what name to use as the visible name of the template, 'Hillary Rodham Clinton' or 'Hillary Clinton'. Randy Kryn 21:10, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Hillary Clinton Supreme Court candidates and Donald Trump Supreme Court candidates‎
In keeping with previous articles in this series, I have created Hillary Clinton Supreme Court candidates and Donald Trump Supreme Court candidates‎. It is a bit earlier than usual, but there is the unusual circumstance of a sitting vacancy on the Supreme Court, and sourced information out there about the leanings of the candidates. Cheers! bd2412 T 23:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I added WikiProject Hillary Clinton, Politics, and United States banners to the talk page --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 23:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Clinton Administration links
Hello all - In the event that H. Clinton does indeed win the U.S. presidency, there will be some cleanup needed of existing articles where the B. Clinton presidency or administration is linked and/or referred to with the adjective "Clinton" having been assumed to have "Bill Clinton" as the only possible meaning. Examples include (and there could be others):


 * "Clinton administration"
 * "Clinton Administration"
 * "Clinton Presidency"
 * "Clinton presidency"
 * "President Clinton"

I am not necessarily advocating making any changes now, but we should be thinking about how such changes ought be implemented if in fact H. Clinton does win the election. We should take into consideration how this has been handled for the Adams, Johnson, Roosevelt, and Bush pairs of same-surnamed presidents. Any thoughts, let's discuss. Thanks KConWiki (talk) 00:40, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Good to be thinking ahead... --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Obviously, this is now something that does not need to be addressed for at least the time being. KConWiki (talk) 13:05, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Status
I reverted User:BrownHairedGirl's edit marking this project as inactive. Can you please at least start a discussion here before just assuming the project is dead? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 13:54, 20 September 2020 (UTC) It would also be very much in your interest to rapidly get learn the distinction between a defunct WikiProject and an inactive WikiProject: see Template:WikiProject status. I have not marked the project as "dead" or as "defunct". -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 14:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I have reverted that revert, and restore the tag as inactive ... because this project meets the criteria at Template:WikiProject status.
 * Discussion is required before making the project as defunct, but not before marking it as inactive. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 13:56, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Do any other project members prefer this project not be marked as inactive? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:02, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * activity is a measurable fact. You don't get to decide to ignore the facts.
 * Feel free to change the status when the facts change ... and take your own advice: stop putting your energy into denying the facts. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 14:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm speaking with project members at this point. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * speak all you like, but the inactivity remains a fact. Please stop your disruption: restore the inactive tag until activity resumes, or I will escalate this. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 14:17, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , My disruption? You're the one coming into project spaces and marking them as dead. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:19, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * it would be very much in your interest to rapidly get over your WP:OWNership issues.
 * , 👍 Don't worry, I'm moving on. Bigger fish to fry... --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:27, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Pinging a couple active editors for feedback. Do you have thoughts on whether this project would be marked as semi-active or inactive? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * please see the criteria set out at Template:WikiProject status. AB wants to ignore the criteria. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 14:27, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with the inactive status. Has the project recently created any new articles within the scope of the project?  Recently brought any articles to GA/FA status?  Done anything else as a project?  Does not look like it to me.  This is not any comment on the importance of the topic, only on whether editors are operating collectively any longer.  UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Joe Biden
Project members may be interested in joining WikiProject Joe Biden. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 13:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Hillary Clinton
User:Buidhe has nominated Hillary Clinton 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 27 August 2022 (UTC)