Jump to content

Talk:Ann Romney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAnn Romney has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 18, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
June 27, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
July 11, 2010Good article reassessmentNot listed
July 19, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Offical bio

[edit]

Unbelievable that the first paragraph of the introduction starts with the negative view, "She has never held a formal job." Obviously written by someone with an agenda. Much more objective would be the statement, "She has worked as a homemaker and raised five children and has not held a formal job."

User:Pro crast in a tor says in edit comment:
trying not to lean on official bio too much (which is the reason this article got deleted previously)

As I read the history, it got deleted because it was a WP:Copyvio of the official bio, which is different. There's nothing wrong with using the official bio as a reference for citing factual statements, like where she went to school and the like. Wasted Time R 19:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, my mistake, but I still think over-reliance on a single source isn't preferred. In any case, it's great to see this article fleshed out! Do you think we should remove the stub template? I'm not sure there's that much more to add about her. Pro crast in a tor 22:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've further expanded it, and am pretty much done. I removed the expand and stub tags. Wasted Time R 02:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have this line in the article "She was a volunteer instructor of middle school girls at the Mother Caroline Academy in Boston." It seems to call into question the accuracy of claims that "Ann Romney has never held a formal job". Never held a paying job, maybe, but that position sounds formal to me.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're responding to a post from 2007. Since then the article hasn't, and doesn't need to, make any statements about whether she's had a job or not. This recent NYT piece addresses the same question and also finds it definitially impossible to answer. However, I've incorporated a couple of activities I hadn't seen before into the article. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:02, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I'm sure I must be related to a princess too. I'm going to delete the similar statement in this article, unless some close connection is shown between Ann Romney and Princess Lilian.Ferrylodge (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please specify the relation. If her father and the future princess were first cousins, for example (they were born in the same year), that would certainly be worth mentioning. I've looked through FamilySearch but can't find it; they don't show any Lillian May Davies born in Wales in 1915, although it's certainly possible I've missed something. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was in a footnote, but I'm taking it back out. In this edit, User:84.50.18.93 gave two sources for this, http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/search/AF/pedigree_view.asp?recid=7985599&familyid=1946789&frompage=99 and http://www.thepeerage.com/p10337.htm, but I don't see the connection: the William Davies in the first married a Margaret Thomas, while the William John Davies of the second married a Gladys Mary Curran. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasted Time R (talk • contribs) 17:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Lady?

[edit]

It is not a tradition in Massachusetts for a governor's spouse to play any significant public role. Add to that the fact that Massachusetts is one of only 3 states without a governor's mansion, and you'll see why real Bay Staters never use the term "First Lady of Massachusetts." Bostoner (talk) 02:42, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point to some sources that support what you say about no significant role and the term not being used? In the opposite direction, there is an official Mass.gov web page for Diane Patrick, which calls her "First Lady" several times. There are assorted news stories over the last four years that also refer to her as "first lady". They also talk about her 2007 depression, with statements like "She says shortly after Deval Patrick was elected, she crashed emotionally, which was made even more difficult because she suddenly was in the public eye." and "In January, Diane Patrick said she felt a tremendous responsibility to being first lady and did not want to let people down." Wasted Time R (talk) 12:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Mormon values?

[edit]

Pulled this out due to objections, but isn't it instructive to put this into the context of general criticism of Mormon values by feminists? Rosen claims that Mitt doesn't believe that women are equals, but this appears to be based on beliefs by non-Mormons that the church is sexist. LGBT activists are among the most vocal critics of the Mormon church and its values. Redhanker (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Mormon church is often criticized for its intolerance of LGBT issues and for promoting traditional roles for women[1] but teaches that men and women are to be equal partners in the home[2]

This isn't context, this is WP:SYNTHESIS, which is against Wikipedia policy. Besides, this information comes from unreliable sources. —Eustress talk 14:17, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Women and Mormonism article is the place for material regarding this question, not here. Wasted Time R (talk) 17:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Sexism in Mormonism
  2. ^ Mormon Women in the Church

Twitter-war on Women (working and at home) ... Motherhood and Apple Pie

[edit]

The Twitter digital campaigning has become increasingly significant. Ann Romney opened a Twitter account specifically to seize the opportunity to reply to Hilary Rosen. No doubt the Romney campaign team assisted her in all aspects (1) technology; (2) crafting her short sentences with two points to make. There is a lot to note here on Wikipedia here with this significant development in the 2012 presidential campaign! Of course, we will keep it succinct and pertinent to the Ann Romney WP article. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 15:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One paragraph is all this story should need at the moment, per WP:UNDUE. —Eustress talk 18:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed but the sentence is incomplete. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One short paragraph is all it needs. If the Hilary Rosen article isn't the right place to handle all the fallout from her statement, then try creating a Hilary Rosen statements about Ann Romney controversy article, although I doubt it would survive AfD. But the story is all about Rosen's comment and all the people who condemned Rosen; Ann Romney's role in it is actually very small and thus not much is needed here in this article. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shamus the Dog

[edit]

Does anyone know if Ann Romney was present during the Shamus the Dog incident? 205.132.119.8 (talk) 18:34, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely, see Seamus (dog). —Eustress talk 20:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent contradiction

[edit]

In the Early life section, the article states "she decided on her own to convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints during 1966. ... (Within a year her two brothers followed her in converting.)"

In the Marriage and children section, the article states that in 1969, "her family could not attend since they were non-Mormons".

These statements appear to contradict each other, and an explanation is therefore needed in the article. Coyets (talk) 08:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've clarified it to "her parents could not attend ..." per the contemporaneous NYT story on the wedding. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:39, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox pic

[edit]

I recently undid a move to change the infobox pic. The suggested pic was off-center and from below. The current pic is centered and taken at a proper level. —Eustress talk 01:13, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neither one is ideal ... a recent, formal portrait photo would be best. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would take Image:Ann Romney.jpg over the one that we have right now. I'd take almost anything over what we have now. I agree that it is not an ideal picture but it is definitely better than the one that's up now... In that photo, her eyes are partially closed, her head is awkwardly contorted, and the lighting is absolutely abhorrent. So the other one is taken from below... big deal, she is smiling, which is much preferable to the awkward half smile found in the current image. Compare them yourself, but absent of a formal or at least better looking portrait, it seems to me that it's a no brainer which one is preferable. Happyme22 (talk) 07:58, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The lack of centering in the one Happy wants could be easily fixed with a crop. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good point Wasted -- I went ahead and cropped it. Happyme22 (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as there have not been any comments for nearly four days, I am prepared to make the change to the proposed picture with crop, unless there are objections and further discussion, of course. Thanks, Happyme22 (talk) 20:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • current
    current
  • proposed change
    proposed change
  • proposed change with crop
    proposed change with crop
I still prefer the current image because it is taken at eye-level. The lighting is not ideal, but it is superior to the alternative pic, which is overexposed. Unless editors other than Happyme22 prefer the proposed change, I think the long-standing current pic should remain. Like WTR stated, though, let's also be on the lookout for other pics. —Eustress talk 21:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, hopefully better ones turn up soon. Happyme22 (talk) 08:48, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on replacing the current photo with this one?

I support it. --Happyme22 (talk) 03:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's five years old and we usually try to have something more recent ... but alas these are still a bunch of bad options to choose from ... Wasted Time R (talk) 10:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me I'm with ya, but the current photo just really irks me because it is so unflattering. At least the one above isn't unflattering -- though older, yes, I'd say it's the best one we have... a straight on, best-we-can-get portrait. Happyme22 (talk) 03:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay with me if you change it, although others may revert it back. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the current image is unflattering... it's nonchalant :) Still hoping a superior pic surfaces. Should be more probably given her visibility these days, but we need people to license their pics for usage on Wikipedia. —Eustress talk 19:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question about their marriage

[edit]

I have two questions about the section that talks about Ann and Mitt's marriage. First, it says that they were married by a "church elder". However, the link is to the article Elder (Latter Day Saints) instead of Bishop (Latter Day Saints) or Branch president, since more often than not it would be one of these who would perform a marriage. But, since I don't know who actually performed the ceremony, I wanted to clear it up. Second, the section states that they were married in a civil ceremony, and then had a temple sealing the next day. I was under the impression that the Church's policy is that you had to wait a year before being sealed if you were married outside of the temple first. Again, I don't know if this has changed, if it's written backward, or if I simply have bad information. Please clear this up for me if anyone can. Thanks. Natt the Hatt (talk) 02:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per the NYT story at the time, they were married by Elder Edwin Jones of the LDS Church. (Edwin Jones's other claim to fame is that Mitt copied his hairstyle after him.) Have no idea about the second question. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  1. A 1067 Life magazine says that Jones took over Geo.'s lay church position in 1962 when Geo. became governor.
  2. 1968 Deseret News: "A graduate of the University of Utah, Mr. Jones took his MS at USU and his PhD from Michigan State University. Last October, Mr. Jones was appointed Regional Representative" (the LDS Church's then- highest ranked (temporary) lay position. ....
  3. Jones's doctorate in Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics was awarded in 1953.LINK
  4. A 1963 Boston Globe said that "Dr. Edwin B. Jones, who is vice president and operations officer of the Michigan Bank, has served as stake clerk during Romney's tenure as head of Detroit-area...."
  5. A 1962 self-published autobiography by an LDS contemporary Michigander says that Jones had been bishop of the Pontiac, MI congregation before assisting Romney as a clerk in the Detroit-area stake (of Zion).
  6. In 1988, when Jones and his wife Mildred S. Jones became the pres. and matron, respectively, of the Chicago LDS Temple, the Ensign (LDS) magazine said, "A retired corporation president, President Jones has served as a regional representative, as a counselor in a stake presidency, and as a bishop." (Apparently the failure to mention that Jones had been a full stake president was an oversight--unless Jones's leadership of the Detroit Stake back in 1962 had been in some type of "acting" position, which seems unlikely.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 05:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Howard J. Stoddard, founder, Michigan National BankRichard by Douglas Poll, Michigan State University Press, 1980, p243: "Edwin Jones, now a regional representative in the Mormon hierarchy as well as a senior officer at Michigan Bank NA...."--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. LATimes: Didn't retire till 80s?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 14:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jones has now been added to this article, using the #2 reference. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Date format needs change

[edit]

If anyone has access to one of those scripts that turns ISO-style "2002-03-22" dates into American-style "March 22, 2002" dates, this article could use the conversion. I made the choice for ISO back when I first started expanding this article in September 2007, but since then the trend for articles like this has been to switch to American style. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of conversion, the article says she converted to Mormon, but doesn't say what she converted from. Did she have a religion prior to this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.67.113 (talk) 09:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article does say: "Raised in the Welsh Congregationalists, he [her father] had become strongly opposed to all organized religion,[5] although on her request the family very occasionally attended church, and she nominally identified as an Episcopalian.[9][10]" Wasted Time R (talk) 09:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ann Romney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:07, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Ann Romney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ann Romney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:48, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grandchildren

[edit]

As of Dec 25, 2018 her twitter account/page claims 24 not 23 grandchildren. The page appears protected, but this probably should be changed in the lead to reflect this (although I don't know what she believes necessary to be counted in that set (i.e adopted, step, foster, informal, etc.) compared to what Wikipedia's definition is....72.16.99.93 (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, multiple sources give 24 as the number now; the article has been corrected. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In October 2021, Mitt announced the arrival of their 1st great-grandchild and why is 24 written in words and not in numbers? [11:22, November 26, 2021‎ 2a00:23c5:80e:6800:c9d3:ee44:9d6e:7279]

I have updated the article to include that. As for the writing in words, per MOS:NUMERAL for two-digit numbers it is editorial discretion. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2023

[edit]

In the first paragraph below the photo/info section, change: She converted to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) in 1966. To: She converted to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) in 1966. Specifically the “t” needs to be capitalized Citation: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/style-guide “The” is officially part of the Church’s name. Thanks Dman52 (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Per MOS:THECAPS - FlightTime (open channel) 17:40, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection

[edit]

Okay, let's give unprotection a go. If it gets silly I can reprotect. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, yes. reprotected now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:05, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ann_Romney&oldid=1210112199"