Talk:Shelley Moore Capito

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Virginia / Albemarle County  (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Albemarle County (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject United States / West Virginia (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject West Virginia (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject U.S. Congress (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
This article has not yet been assigned a subject.
The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", and "Events."


Untitled[edit]

I would argue that this artile should be moved to Shelley Moore Capito, as that is the name she chooses to go by and that is what the press calls her. Youngamerican 14:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Since there had been no objection, I moved the article from Shelley Capito to Shelley Moore Capito, as she has kept her maiden name as a middle name and is known by the latter in the media and Congress. Youngamerican 13:48, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is inaccurate, written from a partisan point of view, and out of date. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SamC (talkcontribs) 11 November 2006.

Of course it's inaccurate. It was mostly written by a guy who does 20,000 edits a year... what kind of quality do you expect. My question is what exactly is her "father's legacy?" Convicted felon? Jasendorf (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 04:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Middle name[edit]

The article for Holly Robinson Peete includes her middle name in the intro. Why not for SMC? Arbor to SJ (talk) 22:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

It seems unnecessarily convoluted to me, and potentially confusing to readers. Is there any indication that it's her legal name? Her birthname is already included in the article in the infopane on the right.CFredkin (talk) 22:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
She consistently goes by Shelley Moore Capito. Adding the middle name would probably just cause confusion. Bitmapped (talk) 03:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

But WP:BIRTHNAME states: "the subject's full name should be given in the lead paragraph, if known (including middle names, if known, or middle initials)." Which is followed in the Holly Robinson Peete article as linked before. And the Hillary Rodham Clinton article uses her middle name in intro. Arbor to SJ (talk) 04:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

The West Virginia Encyclopedia also uses SMC's middle name in intro: http://www.wvencyclopedia.org/articles/940 Arbor to SJ (talk) 04:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
But WP:BIRTHNAME also states: "A woman should be referred to by her most commonly used name, which will not necessarily include her husband's surname."CFredkin (talk) 05:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Nothing explicitly forbids using the middle name in the intro, hence the Peete and Clinton articles leading with inclusions of middle names and husbands' names. Arbor to SJ (talk) 05:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Nothing explicitly requires it either. As stated above, "Shelly Moore Capito" is her most commonly used name. This appears to be the default usage based on the guideline provided.CFredkin (talk) 14:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The article title should reflect the most common name, not the intro to the article. Arbor to SJ (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The second part of your previous statement does not appear in the guidelines provided.CFredkin (talk) 22:01, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
My bad - I should've cited WP:COMMONNAME to back my prev statement. Arbor to SJ (talk) 23:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
This doesn't support your point either.CFredkin (talk) 23:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

My impression is that normal Wikipedia practice is thus: most common name for the article title; full name including middle names etc. if known to begin the article. Many readers who are used to using Wikipedia would expect to find the middle name in that position, and if none is given would assume that she doesn't have one. W. P. Uzer (talk) 09:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

That is right. The lede should always start with the subject's full name. At the moment the article is stating that at some point the middle name 'Wellons' has ceased to be part of the subject's name. I suspect CFredkin may be misinterpreting the words "referred to"; they do not mean in the opening sentence, but in the subsequent article. Sam Blacketer (talk) 09:37, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not advocating for the exclusion of her middle name. My point is that married women who take their husband's name do so via a legal name change. And my impression is that most women who take their husband's name keep their maiden name as their new middle name, and drop their birth middle name, as part of the legal name change. So legally Capito's middle name is likely "Moore".CFredkin (talk) 16:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I think your impression is completely and totally wrong. You will certainly have to provide a citation for that claim. Resolute 20:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
So, regardless of how you feel about my impression, how would you characterize the status of "Moore" in her name? It certainly looks like a middle name to me.
Honestly, equivalent to being part of a hyphenated last name without the hyphen. But even if you want to argue it somehow becomes a "middle name", there is no reason why a person cannot have multiple middle names. Resolute 23:02, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
I've never heard of anyone having 2 last names that aren't hyphenated. Having multiple middle names is definitely possible, but also uncommon.CFredkin (talk) 23:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
What about David Campbell Bannerman? There are many others. Sam Blacketer (talk) 23:47, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we can rule out "Moore" as a last name.CFredkin (talk) 00:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
My point is that it's likely not going to be possible to definitively confirm what her actual legal name is. (I think that's true for most married women.) My take is that explains why the most applicable citation I've seen referenced so far (WP:BIRTHNAME) says that the most commonly used name should be used for women.CFredkin (talk) 23:17, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Again - the common name applies for article title not introduction. And as I've pointed out the West Va. Encyclopedia uses "Shelley Wellons Moore Capito", so there is another source using her middle name with her married. Arbor to SJ (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
You've provided no citations that support your first point. And even if you had, we've already established that "Moore" is a middle name for her. And as stated above, having multiple middle names is very uncommon in the US. There are literally hundreds of sources that give her full name as "Shelley Moore Capito". So far you've provided one that includes "Wellons" as a middle name for her.CFredkin (talk) 20:55, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Just because there are hundreds of sources referring to her without "Wellons", doesn't mean they don't think "Wellons" is part of her full name, they're just not referring to her in a context in which they would want to use her middle name (less-used forename). Wikipedia also wouldn't use Wellons in any practically other context. But in this particular place, at the start of the article, Wikipedia's practice (and that of other encyclopedias) is to include all forenames that we know about. In this case, we do know about "Wellons" (assuming the encyclopedia cited is a reliable source), so it does belong there. We certainly can't omit it based on somebody's "impression" that women generally do this or that when they change their names at marriage - that would be starting to look like original research. W. P. Uzer (talk) 22:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
"Moore" is Capito's middle name. It's not a first name. It's not a last name. It's a middle name. So, if "Wellons" is indeed a middle name for her, why would hundreds of sources include one middle name for her but not the other? The reality is that hundreds of sources support the notion that "Shelley Moore Capito" is her full name. On the other hand, you've provided one source that supports the notion that "Wellons" is a middle name for her.CFredkin (talk) 01:11, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
(Facepalm) For the 100th time, "Moore" is her maiden name. So what if Congressional roll calls use just "Capito"? That doesn't mean "Moore" is a middle name! When Hillary Rodham Clinton served in Congress all the roll calls used "Clinton" - doesn't mean "Rodham" is a middle name! Arbor to SJ (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but that doesn't even make sense.CFredkin (talk) 03:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Makes perfect sense to me, and to everyone else probably. Forget about the term "middle name" if it confuses you - just think forenames and surnames. Shelley and Wellons are forenames, Moore and Capito are surnames or parts of surnames. A change of surname wouldn't be expected to result in any change of forenames. And routine references in text to this or any other person would be expected to use the full surname, but only the commonly used forename. W. P. Uzer (talk) 05:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
That sounds great, except "Moore" isn't a surname in this case. This has already been established above.CFredkin (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
As has been noted, "Moore" is her maiden name. But the argument about this is also irrelevant as this serves only to distract from your attempt to pretend that her middle name up and vanished into thin air one day. Resolute 17:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
"Moore" is in fact her maiden name, and that is indeed irrelevant. When she took her husband's surname as her surname, she did that via a legal name change. Consequently we have no idea if "Wellons" is still a middle name for her. However the preponderance of evidence (as stated above) is that it is not.CFredkin (talk) 18:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

To recap my arguments for why "Wellons" is no longer a legal middle name for her:

1. Capito's maiden name was "Shelley Wellons Moore".

2. Capito took her husband's surname (Capito) when she married, which entails a legal name change. This calls into question whether "Wellons" is still her middle name.

3. Her most commonly used full name today is "Shelley Moore Capito".

4. The House lists members by their surnames, and includes multiple surnames where they exist (see Shea-Porter).

5. The House lists Capito as "Capito". Therefore "Capito" is her one and only surname.

6. Therefore, "Moore" is a middle name; and, if "Wellons" still exists in her legal name, it must be as a middle name.

7. The overwhelming majority of sources reference "Moore", but not "Wellons". (See 3 above)

8. It is not reasonable to assume that literally hundreds of reliable sources would include one middle name, but not another.

Even if you don't buy all the logic above, items 1-3 above are irrefutable and so far only one reliable source has been provided that includes "Wellons" in her full name. However, the source is no more reliable than the hundreds of sources that reference her full name without "Wellons".CFredkin (talk) 19:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

As has already been explained, the fact that certain sources omit certain parts of her name is not evidence that those parts do not exist - it's perfectly normal for any person that most references to him/her (including most references in Wikipedia) will involve some kind of truncation of his/her full name. We have, apparently, a source for "Wellons" as part of her full name, and no source that implies that it isn't (except by the convoluted logic set out above, which is the kind of original research that we are not supposed to do), so for now, the our statement of her full name should include "Wellons". If we really want to know for sure what her current legal name is, I suppose the easiest way to find out would be to write and ask her. W. P. Uzer (talk) 08:58, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Daughter of Arch Moore[edit]

I thought indicating that SMC's father is former WV Gov. Arch A. Moore, Jr. would be info relevant to the lede. Why not? Arbor to SJ (talk) 06:56, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it was reverted by accident, I've restored it. W. P. Uzer (talk) 09:02, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Wellons[edit]

This simple and well-designed RfC asks how to express an American congresswoman's name at the start of the article. It appears that the article subject, Ms Capito, has adopted her unmarried name as a middle name, and the evidence from her website and other publications she controls (such as her facebook page) is that she has ceased to use her former middle name. This does not mean that her former middle name has actually been deleted or removed; we simply have no information on that subject one way or the other. The obvious step is to email the article subject to ask her, and I was pleased see that editors have already tried this (unfortunately without response). So how to proceed?

The discussion below does not reach a true consensus, since there are editors on both sides who remain unpersuaded, so it's necessary to try to extract a Wikipedian-style "rough consensus" from it. On the numbers, the discussion does tend towards the style "Shelley Wellons Moore Capito", and this is the status quo position. Counting against this is the consideration that in the modern world, it's normal courtesy to allow married women the choice of how they want to style themselves and on all the evidence we have, this lady seems to prefer "Shelley Moore Capito". I think that if I was !voting on the discussion, I'd prefer to remove the "Wellons" part. But I'm not !voting, I'm trying to assess the consensus, and I can't see any basis on which this view outweighs the others. I think the correct outcome is no consensus, tending towards no change.

For the avoidance of doubt, I should say clearly that a "no consensus" outcome in a content RfC means that the status quo ante continues to apply: the article should continue to say "Shelley Wellons Moore Capito" for the time being.

Of course, if the Congresswoman responds to the email then her response can be implemented without further bureaucracy, irrespective of the outcome of this RfC. I hope this helps—S Marshall T/C 23:04, 28 September 2014 (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.

Shelley Moore Capito's maiden name was "Shelley Wellons Moore". Is "Wellons" still a middle name for her (and therefore should be included in the full name provided in the intro to her bio)?CFredkin (talk) 14:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

  • No "Moore" became her legal middle name when she married and took her husband's surname. The fact that hundreds of sources give her full name as "Shelley Moore Capito" outweighs a single source which includes both "Wellons" and "Moore" as middle names for her.CFredkin (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
    • No, the fact that she uses "Shelley Moore Capito" as her name in public does not stand as de facto evidence that her middle name up and vanished one day. Unless you show reliable source evidence that Wellons is no longer part of her legal name, your assertion is nothing more than original research/guessing, and certainly is not supported by any Wikipedia policy. Resolute 16:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
"Up and vanished" = legal name change at marriage.CFredkin (talk) 17:30, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Show me sources that confirm she legally removed her middle name when she got married. Resolute 18:56, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
She legally changed her name and made "Moore" a middle name. The sources that include "Moore", but not "Wellons" vastly outweigh the one that I've seen which includes it.CFredkin (talk) 19:16, 7 August 2014 (UTC) First, show me the source that definitively proves that telepathy is not possible, and I'll show you the source that proves that "Wellons" is no longer Capito's middle name.CFredkin (talk) 19:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Please show me sources that state that "She legally changed her name and made "Moore" a middle name". Please show me sources that state she dropped "Wellons" from her legal name. And please, do not waste my time further by responding with your own interpretations. I want sources that explicitly support the claims you are making. Resolute 19:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Show me a source that proves "Moore" is currently a surname for her. Can you find any sources that refer to her as "Moore Capito"?CFredkin (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC) I've already provided a definitive source that refers to her by surname as "Capito".CFredkin (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2014 (UTC) And please stop wasting my time with repeated assertions that hundreds of reliable sources are choosing to exclude a 2nd middle name when they refer to her as "Shelly Moore Capito".CFredkin (talk) 19:55, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Lashing out in bad faith is not an effective way to make your case. Also, your proposed change, your burden of proof. Trying to shift that burden is the surest sign someone is talking out of their behind. So, until you demonstrate the validity of your claim with sources that explicitly say what you are claiming, I am left with no choice but to disregard your argument per WP:SYNTH and to oppose your proposal. Resolute 20:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The bad faith and lashing out in this discussion has not been on my side of the table:

  • Shortly after this dispute was initiated, this thread was initiated with a biased opening and not mentioned here.
  • The edit comment for this edit states that I'm the only editor opposing this change, which is factually inaccurate and misleading.
  • This and this edit could reasonably be described respectively as insulting and patronizing. (I don't see any admonishments from you for them.)

So, please spare me your sanctimony.CFredkin (talk) 21:37, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

This argument has been answered time and time again in the thread next but one above. The "hundreds" of sources are not claiming to give her "full name" in the sense of the name that a WP article would conventionally begin with. W. P. Uzer (talk) 15:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I think it's "a form of original research/guessing", to say that hundreds of sources which reference her full name, including her middle name "Moore", are leaving out another middle name.CFredkin (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I've said this before, but wouldn't the openings of articles Hillary Rodham Clinton and Holly Robinson Peete be precedents as "yes"? Arbor to SJ (talk) 00:22, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Not sure how best to put this but this really does look analogous to Hilary Rodham Clinton to me. Taking the maiden name as a second middle name rather than double barreling is reasonably common. Being known by three of the 4 names is also reasonably common. I would support including Wellons in the opening of the article. There may only be half a dozen sources that use it but that's very common with middle names. SPACKlick (talk) 09:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Have emailed the congresswoman to see what her thoughts are. SPACKlick (talk) 10:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
No response as yet SPACKlick (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I think if there is hundreds of sources that do not have "Wellons" in her name after marriage, that sources would be needed to show that it was indeed kept. In the absence of being able to see the marriage certificate, if an overwhelming number sources refer to her by the same name you have to take that with quite a bit of weight to what her name actually is. AlanStalk 09:35, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Sources not including a less used middle name is not evidence that it doesn't exist, the correct question is are there any sources providing evidence that Wellons is still a middle name? If it is, it should be used in the lede, if not then it shouldn't as it would be original research.
The only sources I can find that are not apparantly sourced to wikipedia are Virginia encyclopedia, Document about her father, West virginia Blue So an encyclopedia created by the West Virginia Humanities council, a document from a fraternity awards ceremony and a blog. So are these reliable and do they meet verifiability policy?
The blog is not reliable. The Fraternity awards document is a better source but I'd be uncomforatble using it on a living person's article. The encyclopedia however seems to meet all the relevant criteria. SPACKlick (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2014 (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.