Talk:John Edwards

"Adulterous Affair"?

This language seems a little strong for WP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.96.119 (talk) 00:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

What part seems strong to you: 'adulterous,' 'affair,' or both in the same sentence? I could see someone claiming redundancy ... but by all definitions it's an accurate statement of what occurred from the sources listed, in my opinion. Hajnalka (talk) 00:08, 3 April 2010 (UTC) best, H

Order of contents

It isn't with Wikipedia normality to put extramarital affair before his political career. Mr. Edwards is a politician first and foremost, that is what he is known for, not for his affair. I suggest reorganizing the content with the same information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.192.132 (talk) 05:05, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

External Link

This piece provides some valuable info into John Edwards' activity post-scandal. Could this go in the external links list? http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/75931/after-the-fall —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishman0 (talk • contribs) 14:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Edwards didn't drop out of presidential race because of reports of his affair

This sentence creates the impression that he quit running for president because of the reporting on his affair: “On January 30, 2008, following allegations of an extra-marital affair, Edwards announced that he was suspending his campaign for the Presidency.[89][90]” The cites don't mention the affair. At the time he dropped out he'd lost several primaries and that was the only reason given for his dropping out. There was no reporting by major news organizations on his affair at that time. He lost primaries in January 2008 and he quit in January 2008. (She had the baby a month later!) He should have quit the previous year when the National Enquirer ran stories on the affair, but he didn't. It's shocking that he didn't drop out, but considering it took him almost 2 years to acknowledge that was his kid, it's consistent. It's shocking that the regular press didn't look into this story so the public could know what this guy was really like before the voting, but that's what happened. He was even considered for VP after he dropped out. This statement really misrepresents what happened. Another Wikipedia article describes what happened more accurately, the mainstream press didn't do any reporting on the affair until months after he dropped out: John_Edwards_extramarital_affair#Initial_National_Enquirer_allegations Also see this article on Hunter, only the National Enquirer covered this story before the primaries: [[1]]

This is such recent history, it's surprising a Wikipedia article would have this wrong. Iful (talk) 08:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

John left out of Elizabeth's will

Inside Edition provided a link to the Elizabeth's last will and testament (http://www.insideedition.com/lib/pdf/5566/edwards-final-pdf.pdf). 199.2.126.188 (talk) 05:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Indictment

Here is a copy http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/06/03/https---ecf.ncmd.uscourts.gov-cgi-bin-show_temp.pl_file1323677-0--11073.pdf of the Edwards indictment WhisperToMe (talk) 15:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Born Johnny

This appears to have never been supported but there is one thread on it in the archives. In any case if "Johnny" is what's on the birth record and "John" was the result of a legal name change, this should be made clear. Lycurgus (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Everettsteele, 3 June 2011

Under 'Indictments' please change "planed" in the sentence 'planed to pursue criminal charges against Edwards' to "planned" as this is a spelling error.

Everettsteele (talk) 21:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Mug shot

Looks like this photo http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-edwards-mug-20110615,0,7349268.story is public domain (from sherrif's office) so I think we should consider including it. 98.118.62.140 (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Under the picture of John..

. please correct the year of Elizabeth's birth... it was not 1977.. it was 1949 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.15.237.92 (talk) 00:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

That's the years they were married, not date of birth.--Cube lurker (talk) 00:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 16 November 2011

News item has said that on Nov. 15, start of trial was set for Jan. 30 (2012). (I.e., request is for the addition of this newly-arrived information.)

I looked up a North Carolina source: http://www.wral.com/news/political/story/10365950/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 16:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

128.63.16.82 (talk) 20:49, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 00:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

{ESp|d}} I've added the news source you (IP) provided and the info to the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)