This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elizabeth Kucinich article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
The same editor has now reverted two different removals of this bit of poorly-sourced trivia. I invite him to present any reasoning he might have for retaining it, keeping in mind that our standards for reliable sourcing (particularly for BLPs) are higher now than they were when this was discussed six years ago. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:38, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This irrelevant detail should stay out of the article. People's body piercings aren't encyclopedic, nor are their tattoos, the jewelry they wear, etc. Just because it's not in a trivia section doesn't mean it's not trivia. INeverCry 20:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that such a triviality does not belong in an encyclopedia. I am also concerned about repeated statements on this page that appear to be dismissive of Mrs. Kucinich's accomplishments and responsibilities while making side remarks that may appear to fall short of non-sexism. I've not seen comments about "easy on the eyes" about husbands of female politicians. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to remove this information 6 years ago using the same logic, albeit probably not phrased as well as INeverCry has done. IMHO it is somewhat demeaning to suggest that a tongue piercing is a primary notable fact about a person, regardless of who that person is. Arzel (talk) 04:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing notable about her is that she's hot. That's the only reason this stub exists. You can be wikipedia pc about it and deny it to the heavens, but we all know that's the truth, like it or not. 124.33.208.179 (talk) 04:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Klax[reply]
Ummm... why does this person have a page? Doesn't really seem to warrant one, other than being: (a) an attractive female (b) married to an older US politician. Everything about this page is fluff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.121.135 (talk) 04:54, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=small}
Comment: This irrelevant detail should stay out of the article. People's body piercings aren't encyclopedic, nor are their tattoos, the jewelry they wear, etc. Just because it's not in a trivia section doesn't mean it's not trivia. INeverCry 20:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)