Talk:Donna Moss

Amy Gardner's Comment

i remember an episode (5th-6th season?) where Amy and Donna were drinking beer in the bullpen late at night when Amy blurted out, "Donna, are you in love with Josh?" I think there was a just a reaction shot from Donna and then it cut to commercial. I suppose that should go in the Josh/Donna relationship as well.

Anyone remember the episode?

Finale of Season 4. It was never really addressed once Sorkin left the show. Rlove 23:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

It was the episode "Commencement", second last in season 4, the one in which Zoey was kidnapped. Her reaction is one of hesitation; we never got to see if she made a reply. I have edited it into the J/D romance story.

Discussion group

What are other people's feelings on including a link to the Yahoo discussion group?. I know Wikipedia is not a web directory, but I don't feel that that state is approached by adding the most important discussion forum on the subject to the site. Would like to hear other's people's opinions.--newsjunkie 14:43, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

External links for wikipedia are supposed to be information sources. You can't even read any of the messages in the discussion group without joining up, it's just a "join this group" ad. --W(t) 14:55, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

Ok, I have to admit I kind of forgot that you couldn't read the messages if you are not registered. But nevertheless, the "closed-to-guests" situation is a staple of many yahoo groups (most of them?). Neither I or anyone else is forcing anyone to join. All the link would imply is that if this is what you are looking for, this is the probably the most active discussion group you will find on the subject. People can easily join to have a look, and just as easily unjoin if they feel that the group is not for them. --newsjunkie 15:26, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Newsjunkie asked if I had an opinion about this as another The West Wing fan and for other reasons... There's some precedent (not exact, the result isn't quite the same) ...since the group associated with a composer of classical music I very much like (whose music I've put a bit of work and time into, but that's off topic) appears in the relevant Wikipedia-page. Sometimes only by joining the group (or a mailing list...) will you learn some news about publications or performances, it's also a members-only-reading Yahoo-group, so it was judged suitable.

If there's a more important page that links to the group, of course, better to link to the webpage and let it link to the group transitively, solving the problem anyway. Can someone point me to a policy or guideline relevant to the external links section (I think I should know this...) ? That would help, anyroad... Schissel : bowl listen 17:59, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Who is "Lou"?

We haven't got the seventh series yet in the UK so possibly there is a new character but am I right in saying that it's meant to be "Leo" and not "Lou" who hired Donna for the Santos/McGarry campaign against Josh's wishes? Arthur Holland 12:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

It is Lou. She is a new character in the seventh season. Rlove 15:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

See Louise Thornton.

American and Canadian?

User:Lucy-marie changed Donna's nationality from "American" to "American/Canadian." The rationale for this was that, in "Dead Irish Writers," Donna learns that her hometown in Wisconsin, which was in the U.S. when she was born, was then moved into Canada. I argue that Donna is still American no matter where her hometown was eventually moved to. She was born in the U.S. and raised as an American in the American culture. She also is very clearly American subsequent to that episode. So, at most, she is Canadian for one epiosde of the 7-season show. (In any case, the whole episode is based on a goof...or dramatic license. The fact that her hometown was in the U.S. at the time she was born makes Donna a natural-born American. They can't retroactively revoke her citizenship just because the town was ceded to Canada sometime after she was born.) So, I think her nationality should be "American" only. Thoughts? --Hnsampat (talk) 18:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The fact that Donna has to take a test to reclaim citizenship, is proof that she IS in fact Canadian (if not willingly or knowingly) and if not would be stateless, during the period when she had to take the test and being told she wasn't a US citizen. Being forcibly made stateless is illegal under united states citizenship law. It is only a minor point but a factually accurate point. Another example is Irish hundreds of people are Irish by descent but relatively few claim the citizenship but they are still Irish regardless.--Lucy-marie (talk) 21:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The border was set by treaty in the 1800's and did not prove during Donna Moss's lifetime. The issue was that it was resurveyed, and they discovered that the town had always been on the Canadian sign of the border, even though no one knew this until after Donna was born.

If the town had been in the U.S. when she was born, then she would be solely a U.S. citizen. The legal issue was that because the town had actually been in Canada when she was born, she was technically not born in the U.S.

71.109.154.133 (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Diane Moss

In the episode 'angel maintenance' Donna when talking to Josh about 'doing more' says 'also dead Diane Moss'. More research needs to be done into Donna's full name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.9.144.30 (talk) 15:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

First, for people reading this who are unfamiliar with the context, let me explain. Donna is complaining to Josh about how she doesn't do as much as other assistants do. She also says that if she and Josh were ever killed by a terrorist bomb, then the article would lead with, "Deputy White House Chief of Staff Josh Lyman was tragically killed today by a terrorist bomb. Also dead, Diane Moss." Her point there is that not only would she be considered an "also dead", but that the media would get her name wrong, too. It's a joke. --Hnsampat (talk) 15:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The main concern with this article

The most important thing to remember is that Donna Moss never existed. While a discussion occurred and a decision made to keep the article itself, that does not mean editors can throw in anything about this completely fictional person on a TV show about other non-existent people. The only sources listed are other Wikipedia articles describing episodes of this fictional series. Most of the article as it stands are paragraphs without any sources, because there can be few, if any, reliable sources about a TV character. Material without reliable sources must be removed - this is standard Wikipedia policy. See also: Wikipedia guidelines on notability, in-universe and indiscriminate information. Catherinejarvis (talk) 17:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability, "any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed", it's not "must be removed". This article is not about a living person. I personally wouldn't mind another AFD about this (and other related articles) or try to merge the article but not just cutting the article. The complete article without sources is at least handy for the reader, the cut article is totally pointless. Garion96 (talk) 19:53, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

As an ardent fan of The West Wing and as one "in love with Donna Moss" (!), I too feel surprised and sorely displeased about the unilateral, undiscussed (not previously discussed), large-scale removals of descriptive material about not only Donna but also the other characters.

Although Donna Moss has never existed as a live person, she has nonetheless existed – and she still exists – as a significant character in a significant artistic creation.

Let's pause here and inject a dose of common sense into this problem. If the subject of this article were a live person, then we would indeed expect and require outside "reliable sources" for all the assertions in the article. However, since the subject is a fictional character, we still require a "reliable source", but the "reliable source" here is the program material itself – that is, the dialogue and the action – the words and the nonverbal behavior of Donna, Josh, and the others. Yes, we truly do have a "reliable source", which in this case consists of the recorded and preserved program material.

Besides, is there a genuine dispute about anything in the removed text? Has anyone complained of any false statement, misrepresentation, or inaccuracy?

Or is this just an artificial contest stirred up by one person riding a hobby horse of her own and insisting on her personal view or interpretation of the word may?

I respectfully suggest that such a removal – a large one and one not previously discussed – is presumptuous, inappropriate, inconsiderate, insensitive, and counterproductive.

Further, I likewise respectfully propose a discussion about not only the removal here but also the similar removals with regard to the other characters of The West Wing.

What say you, gang? Let's talk about it, and then, I hope, let's restore those ill-advised and one-sided removals.

Doc.

DocRushing (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The border did not change

Strictly speaking, the statement that the "Minnesota town in which she was born ended up in Canada due to border changes" is incorrect.

The border was not changed. What happened was that they discovered the town was in Canada, and had always been in Canada, but no one had known this, because the original border survey was not very accurate.71.109.154.133 (talk) 04:05, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Relationship with Josh Lyman

This section needs to be updated to include their eventual romantic relationship in the final seasion. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 01:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)