Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government

Popular pages report

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, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Biography.

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 Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, 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 WikiProject Biography, 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)

Auto-archiving?

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)

David J. Hickton and Roy C. Start category?

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)

Jake Zimmerman

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)

RfC at Karl Marx

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)

Discussion at Gillian Keegan#Photo under wrong licence at commons

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

Additional input needed...

...here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Jackson

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)

Succession boxes for people elected under STV-PR (and possibly other PR systems)

I noticed something odd about the succession box in the Trevor Clarke article; it says he continued to represent the South Antrim NIA constituency after his seat was abolished. After some investigation, I'm still confused about what is or should be standard practice for succession boxes covering representatives of multi-member constituencies like the South Antrim NIA constituency.

What should I do with Clarke's succession box? His seat was abolished in the sense that he has five simultaneous successors as MLA in South Antrim and he had been the 6th. However, the succession box refers to "MLA for Antrim South", not "6th MLA for Antrim South".

Tim Ivorson 2018-03-09

Hi Tim, I agree it's confusing to say SEAT ABOLISHED when it hasn't yet been explained that the seat was only one of six for the constituency. Probably the best way to fix this is to modify the infobox template to allow us to specify the seat number for multiple-member constituencies. I'll have a look! At the moment, the words "seat abolished" link to the STV page, which helps a bit; alternatively we could append the seat number to the end date value so it displays "day month 2007 - day month 2017 (seat 6)"... assuming he was elected in 6th place in Assemblies 3 and 4 as well as 5, which we should check!! -- sam^💬 18:40, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Further digging reveals that Clarke was elected 4th in 2007. That is to say he was joint 4th elected with two others, but had the highest STV total of the three at that stage. [1] Then 3rd in 2011, and 6th in 2016. Paul Girvan was elected 1st in 2017. This is too much faff to account for in an infobox, so I'm going to state "multiple members" rather than "seat abolished". We can only name successors and predecessors when there's a co-option. You'll see how I've dealt with that on the page. -- sam^💬 22:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Oh gourd lod, they're all like this. Every single MLA. I'll bet people have just been sticking in a random MLA from their party as the predecessor or successor at elections. Template text to use:

DESCRIBE CHANGES: Assembly successors and predecessors at elections amended to "multiple members"; circumstances stated for unique successors and predecessors; Assembly election links added.

multiple members

multiple members

-- sam^💬 00:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for assistance

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)

Roseanne Barr GAR

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

3rd party eyes are necessary.

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)

Aubrey Dunn Jr.

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)

RfC notification

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)

RfC Notification

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)

Stylistic question about capitalization of "independent" in an infobox

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)

• I think we have to go by what reliable sources do, and, frankly, I've never seen any news source use "(i)", it's always (I). Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
• What's in the infobox is sort of like a heading. Headings are always capitalized. The word "Independent" should therefore be capitalized as well. Display name 99 (talk) 22:25, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
• There are more Independents than just US-Independents. In Ireland, it is common to capitalize. See for example in this news article: Enda Kenny is re-elected as Taoiseach in the Dáil. The Banner talk 22:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for this input, The Banner. However, in this case there appears to be a party or association named, The Independent Alliance, which properly should be capitalized, as should its short-hand mention as "Independents". Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 11:36, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
    • There is indeed a political grouping (not being a party) but Michael Harty is truly an Independent politician. No party involved and the given link reflects that. The Banner talk 13:19, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
      • The article, Independent Alliance (Ireland), uses "independent politicians" (lc) to refer to those members identified. Note that the banner at the bottom of Michael Harty says, "This article about an independent politician in Ireland is a stub", also using lc. HopsonRoad (talk) 20:22, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
• Summary of discussion I wish to thank everyone, who has responded, so far. At this point, I concur with Beyond My Ken that it's good practice to follow the lead of reliable sources in abbreviating "independent" with a "(I)". I concur with Display name 99 that it makes sense to treat an entry in an infobox like a heading, which would confer an upper case to "Independent" in that setting. I don't concur with The Banner, if the suggestion is that it's generally appropriate to treat "independent" as a proper noun, when referring to Irish politicians, unless it's part of a phrase that refers to a named group like the Independent Alliance (Ireland) of Ireland. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 20:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Your conclusion about my words is 100% opposite from what I have said. I have said that politicians like Michael Harty are always referred as "Independent", so with a capital. The Banner talk 21:11, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
    • I understood that you consider "independent" as a proper noun in reference to Irish politicians and advocate for capitalization. I simply said that I don't concur—nor does the article about Michael Harty in the banner at the bottom nor does the article on Independent Alliance (Ireland). Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 21:21, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
    • A sampling of Category:Independent politician in Ireland stubs revealed no instances where "independent" was capitalized, except at the beginning of a sentence. HopsonRoad (talk) 20:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

John R. Holmes

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

RfC at Roseanne Barr

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)

Discussion at talk:Donald Trump#RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?

 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)

Winston Churchill - reference probems

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)

Jim Jordan

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)

RfC on Ron DeSantis "monkey" quote

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)

Sean Tevis

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)

RFC: Successor-elects in the infobox

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should we add the successors of incumbents like this edit? Corky 16:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Support

1. We've been doing it this way for years. Why change now? GoodDay (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
2. (Summoned by bot) useful information to have in an infobox. Coretheapple (talk) 16:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
3. The elected individual is highly likely to take office. Our readership, following an election and prior to stepping down (particularly in locales, such as the US, where there is a large gap between the two), would generally be interested in the designated successor. There's little harm to adding the successor-elect, and the (elect) parenthetical amply shows the succession hasn't taken place yet. Icewhiz (talk) 17:04, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
4. (Summoned by bot) As per GoodDay and Icebox. The (elect) parenthetical makes status clear.HouseOfChange (talk) 12:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Oppose

1. per my discussion Talk:Jeff Colyer#Putting successor in infobox. We have never listed a successor until they have officially taken office, just like Obama's infobox didn't list Trump until January 20, 2017. Samtondiaz 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)
2. I think we don't list successors until they have taken office. Would prefer consistency about this across articles.Seraphim System ^(talk) 18:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
3. I think this is a great idea in concept, however, it would introduce a factual inaccuracy as a successor is not a successor until they have succeeded and, as likely as it may seem a President-Elect would become President, we shouldn't WP:CRYSTALBALL. I also think this has the potential to become messy. In the US case, the POTUS is universally referred to in RS as "president elect" within a day or two of election day, but isn't "president elect" until the Electoral College elects him or her. To invoke a different example, Chuck Grassley is President Pro Tempore of the Senate and, if he dropped dead tomorrow, we already know under existing rules that Mitch McConnell would become the Pro Tempore. However, McConnell would lose his status as de facto successor having never succeeded if there is a party shift at some point in the future. This becomes very messy and will lead to future arguments as to when to activate the parameter. I would support, however, adding an "anticipated successor" (or similarly named) parameter to the infobox to ameliorate this dilemma. Chetsford (talk) 02:59, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

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)

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)

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)

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)

The more general problem of losing candidates' articles

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)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RFC: Where to place 'Acting', 'Elect', 'Designate' etc in infoboxes

There is a clear consensus for option 2. Editors support using:

• Governor-elect of Idaho
• Acting Governor of Massachusetts
• Premier-designate of New Brunswick

over:

• Governor of Idaho
  Elect,
• Governor of Massachusetts
  Acting
• Premier of New Brunswick
  Designate.

Cunard (talk) 06:32, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Where should we place terms like 'Acting', 'Elect', 'Designate' etc inside infoboxes of political bios? GoodDay (talk) 02:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Option 1: are the top 3 boxes
Option 2: are the bottom 3 boxes

Brad Little
Governor of Idaho Elect

Jane Swift
Governor of Massachusetts Acting

Blaine Higgs
Premier of New Brunswick Designate

Brad Little
Governor-elect of Idaho

Jane Swift
Acting Governor of Massachusetts

Blaine Higgs
Premier-designate of New Brunswick

See examples →

• Option 2 for all – Governor-elect is what you see in new sources (I’ll include them if requested), and “acting” goes before the title per news sources (I’ll include them if requested). Adding a break to the titles is just adding more (wasteful) space to the infobox/article. Corky 03:24, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
• Option 2 for all The correct phrasing is "Governor-elect", "Acting Governor", "Premier-designate". Nobody would say "Governor of Idaho Elect" in describing who Brad Little is, they would say "Governor-elect of Idaho". Also, it's unnecessary to add a line break in that parameter. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
• Option 1 for all or Option 2 for all - as my major concern is consistency across these infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 03:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
• Option 2 - the top-line is misleading if one misses the bottom line - e.g. if one were only to read the first line and miss the second, one may be confused to think that the -elect individual is actually holding office. Icewhiz (talk) 17:09, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gentlemen - @Icewhiz:, @Muboshgu:, @Corkythehornetfan: - it's been over a year since the closure of the Rfc & the consensus reached here, hasn't been applied overall on the bio political article infoboxes. Some of yas haven't been showing much energy in getting it applied. I can't do it all myself & so I'm not going to try anymore. GoodDay (talk) 01:49, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

I don’t edit much anymore, so I’m of no help. Sorry. Corky 05:23, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

GoodDay, I do believe I change Option 1 to Option 2 whenever I come across it. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm very much done with it. PS - Just noticed that Icewhiz, is banned. GoodDay (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Catalina Cruz (politician)

Hello! If possible, I would like some input in the "Lead" thread. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Scott Smith (American politician) GAR

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)

Possible AfD and almost certain COI- Vincent Harris (political strategist)

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)

Consensus on the "series/sidebar" layout for politicians/officeholders

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

Ferdinand Marcos

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)

Azarias Ruberwa

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)

Nomination of Portal:Donald Trump for deletion

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)

Nomination of Portal:Barack Obama for deletion

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)

MP Brexit Position in Infobox

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)

RfC of possible interest

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)

Discussion at Talk:Adi Laufitu Malani#Requested move 3 October 2019

 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)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

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)

Benard Odoh

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)

Balance at Forced into Glory

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see: Talk:Forced into Glory § Balance: Conflict between Lincoln critics like Bennett, and critics of those critics.

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)

Judge Judy GAR

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)

RfC on political party of David Clarke (sheriff)

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

Draft:Clay Jenkins

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)

Joe Biden

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)

Kamala Harris

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)

• What is the issue? The sourcing is quality. The information is accurate, and your claim that it is "excessive" is a judgment call. Senator Harris has had a long career with many career milestones. She's a historical figure in her own right in the state of California. The article is no less voluminous or detailed as the one that Governor Jerry Brown has, and abides by all rules. Please elaborate further on what your issue is. Bnguyen1114 (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Bnguyen1114, please indent properly. Yes, it is a matter of judgment, and in none of your edits do I see that you have any editorial judgment at all. You insert just about every factoid you can, and you had to be told that we work by way of secondary sourcing here. In the meantime, you've gone right back to bloating up the article. Drmies (talk) 14:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Before I began working on this article, the editors let stand four paragraphs devoted to a single campaign finance violation in 2003, still has the entirety of her tenure at the DA's office before she ran still up, an entire paragraph detailing a single conversation with a protestor, complete with a quote about being embarrassed, and tons of misleading information about Steve Mnuchin. I followed the example of over-inclusion. If the concern is readability, I can pare it down and make it readable. It is unreasonable for people to expect me to know about standards they've made up for themselves and then reverting my hard work because they never told me about them. So, can I please get back to work, as an editor this time? Bnguyen1114 (talk) 14:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Eh, Jerry Brown's article is 100k. This is 2,5 times the size. Drmies (talk) 14:46, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
    • All the bloat you speak of - settlement numbers, seizures, everything measurable? I can reduce whole paragraphs to a single sentence. No problem. Bnguyen1114 (talk) 21:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
• It is worth mentioning that before I started working on this article (late April), you had entire articles, five paragraphs long, copy and pasted into her Campaign Finance violations in 2003. I pared it down and consolidated it with her 2003 campaigning. Why the sudden change in tact? There is so much misinformation ("She didn't prosecute Mnuchin!" was a section before I detailed the actual legal issues in that instance) out there about Senator Harris that she needs a thorough airing of her record. So what do you want to do about it? Bnguyen1114 (talk) 18:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

O.P.S Bhadoria

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)

Talk:Jenny_Durkan#Deletion_of_controversies

Could someone look at the content issues there? Needs more discussion. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

RE: Debate on creating a Chris Mullin disambiguation page (now it automatically leads to the basketball player)

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)

RFC about the ways to discuss Margot's gender identity

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

RfC about Nikolai Lukashenko

Talk:Nikolai Lukashenko § Should content cited to social media posts and WP:OR be removed from this article? I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 23:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Style (Honorary Prefixes & Suffixes)

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)

Peer Review Request - Draft:Christopher Hollins

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)

Question about handling "early life" and "personal life" sections

I am working on behalf of former U.S. Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin (my full disclosure is on the talk page for his biographical article) and, due to my COI, I will not make any direct edits to the article. Recently I posted a request to split up the current Family, education, and early career section to an editor who had made a handful of recent edits after I made my first suggestion on the talk page. However, they were uncertain on the best way to approach this particular subject matter, and besides which were ambivalent about taking my suggestions, given my COI. I am doubtful that there is specific guidance from WP:WPBIO about whether to consolidate or keep separate "early life" and "personal life" sections, but if I am wrong I figure this is a good place to ask, especially pertaining to biographies of former government officials. Anyone here reading this have any insight or perspective? I'll just close by adding that it's not my intention to insist on the exact words I have proposed, but to seek a resolution of the issues I've identified with the current structure. Thanks in advance, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 18:35, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@WWB Too:

Wikiprojects cities has structured guidelines for what section goes where, but biography seems to be rather open. I looked at George W. Romney (featured article) and good articles Charles Rangel, and Bill Clinton to compare. I will sit back and wait for the comments on positioning as I am curious myself, but I think the extended details about the partner's career creds and children's partners and their heritage ought to be omitted.

From the Rangel article:

Rangel met Alma Carter, a social worker, in the mid-late-1950s while on the dance floor of the Savoy Ballroom in Harlem. They married on July 26, 1964. They have two children, Steven and Alicia, and three grandsons.

The version about children you're proposing for Robert Rubin and the strike-through is what I think should be omitted.:

Rubin is married to Judith Leah (Oxenberg) Rubin, who served as the New York City Commissioner of Protocol for four years under Mayor David Dinkins and is the chairwoman of the board of trustees of Playwrights Horizons. The Rubins have two grown sons, James ("Jamie") Rubin, former Director of State Operations for New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and Philip Rubin. Jamie is married to writer Gretchen Rubin.

Graywalls (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 November 11 § File:Elbegdorj.JPG

 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)

RfC on succession boxes on US presidential biographies (and the future of succession boxes)

An RfC is occurring at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Succession boxes for US Presidents 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)

Adding the rest of the local politicians

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

Infobox for Senator that never took office

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)

• On a related note, is there a category that reflects people who were elected to office but died before their terms began, such as the aforementioned Monroe Hayward? I thought of this because Luke Letlow, a Representative-elect from Louisiana, died this week. Another example would be astronaut Jack Swigert, who was elected to Congress in 1982 but died before his term began. This is not the same as Category:Politicians elected posthumously, since these people were alive when elected but did not live to be sworn in. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
  • I've just been informed of the creation of Category:Elected officials who died without taking their seats within the last 24 hours. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox member of the Knesset

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)

Any input appreciated

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)

RFC at WP:POLITICS, concerning succession boxes

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

Jamie Raskin section editwar

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)

GA reassessment for Hugo Black

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)

Feedback requested at Augusto Pinochet

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)

Charles Edward Magoon at FAR

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)

Jon Corzine Good Article Reassessment

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)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 July 14 § File:Jo Grimond.jpg

 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)

RfCs of interest

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere. RfCs are underway at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Presidents concerning the removal or retention of US president series boxes at associated articles and the removal or retention of US vice-president series boxes at associated articles.

• 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)

Notice of Featured Article Review

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)

Political Party succession boxes.

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)

Notice of Featured Article Review

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)

I have proposed merging Media coverage of Bernie Sanders into Bernie Sanders

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)

FAR notice

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)

MP for twenty years, but never spoke in Parliament: politician, yes or no

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)

Expelled status in infobox?

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)

Good article reassessment of Alan Keyes

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)

Congressional slaveholder mini-project

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)

Two issues: RfC on use of sources and looking for a project on the Revolution/U.S. Founding

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)

The link to the RfC: Request for comment on use of sources Allreet (talk) 17:14, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Wesley Clark

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)

RfC notification

A request for comment that may interest members of this project has been opened at Talk:Donald Trump § RfC: Should the lead section have any citations?. ––FormalDude talk 19:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE and sourcing issues.

I'm notifying the wikiproject of an article in need of help here: Talk:Charlotte Durante § The state of the article. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 09:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Featured Article Review: Andrew Jackson

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)

Move review for Frank Mrvan

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)

Jefferson Davis FAR

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)

Raymond A. Harris

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)

Request for Comment about Kari Lake

There is a Request for Comment at Talk:Kari Lake § Request for Comment: politician or political candidate? that may interest members of this WikiProject. Please participate at the talk page. ––FormalDude (talk) 07:50, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

House of Councillors NSTV

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)

Andry Rajoelina

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)

GAR notice

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)

Good article reassessment of Mauricio Macri

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)

GAR of Eva Perón

Eva Perón

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisting per general consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

GA from 2006, it was't reassessed. Half of the article is unsourced, with 'This article needs additional citations for verification.' on top, 5 'citation needed' tags and two 'This section does not cite any sources' templates (Female Peronist Party and women's suffrage and Honours), see also unsourced sections: Juan Perón's arrest, 1946 presidential election, European tour, Vice-presidential nomination, Re-election and Spiritual Leader of the Nation; and 19 'page needed' tags. Artem.G (talk) 19:17, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Delist - Article needs a lot of work to be kept as a GA. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Delist per above. Needs significant work. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Category:Lists of heads of state

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)

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)

Sherman Minton Featured article review

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)

Does Draft:Sam Lawrence (Ohio Politician) meet notability criteria

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)

Is there a standardised way of showing donors to politicians in their articles?

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)