Talk:Bibliography of Hillary Clinton

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bibliographies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bibliographies 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.BibliographiesWikipedia:WikiProject BibliographiesTemplate:WikiProject BibliographiesBibliographies articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Bill Adair (April 16, 2008). "Yes, from American Evita to The Very Unofficial Hillary Clinton Coloring Book". PolitiFact.com.
Brian Koerber (22 May 2017). "Hillary Clinton Wikipedia page redirected to 'Mein Kampf' for 16 hours and no one noticed". Mashable. Despite how much we all love it, Wikipedia is not a credible source. That's because any one can edit content at any time, adding in falsehoods that can sit there until, well, someone notices. Case in point: a page dedicated to the bibliography of Hillary Clinton redirected to Adolf Hilter's autobiography Mein Kampf on Monday for over 16 hours.

Fair use rationale for Image:Condivshilary.jpg

Image:Condivshilary.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done thank you.

Fair use rationale for Image:TruthAboutHillary.jpg

Image:TruthAboutHillary.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done thank you.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage

The article title indicates "books". I suggest separating out book sections and articles, from the list of books.Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and did that.Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The separate listings by different variants of her name is silly and WP:POINTY, as I'm sure you must realize. The header should just be "By Clinton", within which her works should be in chronological order. The cite for each one can include what name it was published under, just like any cite would.

As for the overall structure, I never included op-ed columns by her because it's hopeless to try to include op-ed columns about her (Maureen Dowd of the NYT must have published a hundred snarky ones just by herself). That's why I limited it to scholarly and near-scholarly (e.g. Foreign Affairs) publications. On the other hand I see the value of presenting work published under her name, even if it's just an op-ed. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "by Clinton" would be okay, but the books already had a "By Hillary Rodham Clinton" heading so I just went with that kind of thing. Either way works for me, as long as books are separate from non-books. Also, if you would like to limit the non-books to ones written by Hillary, that would be fine too. I'll let you decide.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've broken columns out into their own section, with the intent that it includes only ones by Hillary, and I've put them in proper chronological order. There must be a bunch that are missing, though. Just looking through the New York Times archive, I see this one from 2015 and this one from 2004 and this one from 2002 and this one from 2009 and this one from 1995 and this one from 2004 and this one from 2012 and this one from 1997 and this one from 2012 and this one from 2008. And that's just one paper ... I'm not sure how feasible listing all of these is going to be. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:37, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I put the {{Expand list}} tag in there. I've also just narrowed the scope of the "Columns" section so that it only includes Clinton.Anythingyouwant (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why so many books are mean to Hillary

The lede says: "As with other controversial political figures (such as George W. Bush), there tends to be a larger market for critical than supportive books." A hidden note says: "This phenomenon has been noted often; see for example http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1006298,00.html http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2007/06/06/at_bookexpo_a_fractured_right_and_an_energized_left/ http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2003-11-03-political-books_x.htm "

However, the greater number of negative books about a person is often because the person was actually lousy; see Joe McCarthy, Joe Stalin, Richard Nixon, Jack the Ripper, etc. I cannot access the Time article, but neither of the other two hidden sources say why Clinton has a lot of negative books about her. Accordingly, to avoid original research, I think the unsourced sentence ought to be removed.

I object to a statement in the lead that essentially says: "Pay no attention to those negative books, they only exist for money-making purposes."Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Time piece talks about the success of the angry book industry, but does not mention Clinton by name. If you've ever watched cable TV news, or read political blogs, or listened to talk radio, you know that praising A always gets less time or space than ranting against B; it's just human nature. In the current totally polarized American political climate, it's responsible for things like Bush Derangement Syndrome, which has also occurred during the Clinton and Obama administrations. This PolitiFact piece says "The anti-Clinton market must be considerably more lucrative because it has four times the pro-Clinton offerings," but they may have thought it just because this article said it. Another whole school of thought is that professional conservatives just have a visceral hatred for Hillary, and thus can't get enough of writing bad things about her; see this TPM piece or this Daily Beast piece or this Atlantic piece. Or maybe you are right, and Hillary is really as bad as the people you name, although even in Bob Tyrrell's most fevered dreams I don't think he'd put her on a level with Stalin, who after all was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No question Stalin was a murderous tyrant, but he was also responsible for killing 90% of the Nazis who died in WWII, which gives him some redeeming features that perhaps HRC lacks (unless one admires killing Khadaffi without congressional consent so that anarchy would befall Libya and other regimes would understand the risks of forswearing nuclear weapons). Anyway, the larger number of negative books about Clinton and Bush ought not be dismissed in the lead of either list, or in Richard Nixon bibliography, so I'll remove it along with the "cn" tag.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bad URL

The url "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliography_of_Hillary_Clinton#Anti..." doesn't work in Facebook because the three dots have a different meaning there. Changing the anchor to "#Anti" would both improve readability and make peace with Facebook. AND fair warning, the three dots don't even work here on this talk page: Notice that the little blue link icon precedes the three dots. They've been lopped off here too! Page Notes (talk) 02:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 June 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of books by or about Hillary Rodham Clinton → List of books by or about Hillary Clinton – Per WP:CONSISTENCY with Hillary Clinton. While many of these books include Rodham, this is a reference to her, and consensus on WP supports referring to her as Hillary Clinton. В²C ☎ 20:30, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The number of books published by "Hillary Clinton" is zero; all five, including one that sold over a million copies, were published under "Hillary Rodham Clinton". The number of scholarly articles or works published under "Hillary Clinton" is one; four of the other five, including one that became influential in its field, were published under "Hillary Rodham". Her syndicated column was published under "Hillary Rodham Clinton" and most of her op-ed columns since then have been too (with variations for the house style of the newspaper involved). Of all the books about Hillary here, the two best and most widely read are probably Bernstein's A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Gerth/Van Natta's Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton and another famous/notorious one is Brock's The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. Regarding "consistency" of titles of subarticles about her, that isn't going to happen anyway, since Hillary Rodham cattle futures controversy refers to events before she ever started using her husband's name and Hillary Rodham senior thesis refers to something that took place before she was even married. For all these reasons, the current article title is the one that best fits the diversity of publications being listed here and there is no need to change it. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. The vast majority of the listed adult book titles refer to "Hillary Clinton" or "Hillary and Bill Clinton" rather than "Hillary Rodham Clinton". Admittedly, this excludes childrens' books, but this is not Simple Wikipedia and so the general-audience books count for a lot more. Anyway, the reasons for titling the main "bellweather" article Hillary Clinton ought be relevant here too. If this was only a list of books authored by her, then I would agree with WTR. However, WTR is correct that all of the listed books by her are by HRC. So I am neutral.Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:50, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The name Rodham is highly prominent throughout the list. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:51, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As per Wasted Time R - all of her books and the most prominent biographies use her full name.Tvoz/talk 02:09, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. She opted to use her full name on the cover of every one of her works. So when the contracts were drawn up by her lawyers and her publishers, when the manuscripts were handed in, when the book was promoted, the name she chose to use, every time, was Hillary Rodham Clinton. Randy Kryn 2:20, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I may be neutral here but....please see the list of her columns. Many were signed "Hillary Clinton" instead of HRC.Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:UCN – Her common name in RS is "Hillary Rodham Clinton", as demonstrated by the books listed in this article. RGloucester — ☎ 02:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I may be neutral here, but ... count the book titles that use HRC versus HC, excluding the childrens' literature. Way more use HC.Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support - Common name accounts for the language used by people writing books about her and the language used in secondary sources to refer to her as an author, not just the subject's personal preference. I haven't looked into it enough but I would guess that the name they refer her by in coverage about her as an author would not differ too much from coverage of her as a politician/personality. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wasted Time R (also, "Hillary Rodham" appears much more than "Hillary Clinton" in this article) Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:39, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

User:Michipedian's rename of this page ((Move log); 20:46 . . Michipedian (talk | contribs) moved page List of books by or about Hillary Rodham Clinton to List of books by or about Hillary Clinton over redirect ‎) was improper and should be reverted. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Michipedian. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Michipedian's instincts were spot on and his actions demonstrate that the current title should be changed. I tried with the last RM; someone else could do the next one. --В²C ☎ 06:14, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How about this one?

‪*Zeifman, Jerry. Hillary's Pursuit of Power. Xlibris Corporation‬, 2006. ISBN ‪1-42571-791-8.‬ Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:39, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Xlibris is a self-publishing outfit, see their web site at http: // www. xlibris. com / about_xlibris.aspx [I've had to break it up because it got flagged by WP's blacksite list when I hit 'Save', which tells you something]. A book has to have a real, conventional publisher to be listed here. Zeifman did put out a book in 1996 via a real publisher, Without Honor: The Impeachment of President Nixon and the Crimes of Camelot (Thunder's Mouth Press), but that wasn't Hillary-specific. Given the existence of Regnery, WND Books, and other conservative politics imprints, having a real publisher is a pretty low bar to meet but I guess Zeifman couldn't find one for his Hillary book. Note also that Zeifman's central allegations regarding Hillary and the House Judiciary Committee are bogus, see this Snopes piece for example. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks. I'm curious what he said about her in the 1996 book, even if that book does not belong in this list.Anythingyouwant (talk) 10:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 September 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as proposed. SST flyer 13:55, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography of Hillary Rodham Clinton → Bibliography of Hillary Clinton – Earlier this year, there was a rather extensive discussion that Hillary Clinton's article should be titled as such; no Rodham. This page should be bound by that discussion. Also, this should be called "Bibliography" rather than "List of books by and about" (its previous title) to be consistent with the titles of similar pages. p b p 13:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC) p b p 13:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support, regardless of how you feel about how Clinton's regular article is titled, there's no reason not to be consistent between pages Nohomersryan (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per the 2015 RM above (done after the novel-length HRC to HC name-change event/circus). Many items on this page come from before her marriage to Bill Clinton, when she also had a life, and were published under her unmarried name. Then all the books she's written afterward (I don't know about her newest) include her full name, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as the author. Please read the 2015 RM above for more reasons and reasoning. Randy Kryn 16:46, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
She uses 'Hillary Clinton' on her newest book, the 2016 campaign book co-authored by Tim Kaine. So that ends her consistency on personally using her full name on book titles, although I'll still oppose this nom per the other convincing points brought forward in the 2015 RM. Randy Kryn 19:22, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per main article. Many subjects have had multiple names or combinations of their names during their lives with the different versions appearing on their output and coverage. Sub-ordinate articles should use the same form as the main article, not have a confusing mixture and refights of the same issues on multiple pages. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support move so that the bibliography uses the same name as the main article Hillary Clinton. Geny S. Soboes (talk) 18:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Support per nom. Obviously. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Simple rule: follow the main article (consistency), conciseness, etc. --В²C ☎ 21:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weaker oppose than previously. "Stronger Together: A Blueprint for America's Future" by Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine could be said to show that HRC no longer publishes as HRC. However, I am not convinced that this is a book. It is a cut and paste compilation of previously existing campaign material. I'd prefer to wait a few more months, post campaigning, to see what scholarly sources do. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:00, 20 September 2016 (UTC) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2016/09/16/the-new-clintonkaine-campaign-book-is-just-deplorable/ [reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

What happened? People got obsessed over current events. HRC always publishes as HRC, if excluding non-serious things like campaign pamphlets and ballot names. The latest book makes it clear that her chosen name is Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hillary Rodham pre-marriage, and the title should be changed back. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:21, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Book of Gutsy Women makes it pretty clear, that one campaign non-book was an outlier. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:51, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Book article

She announced today that she is releasing a the book State of Terror on October 12. Elijahandskip (talk) 14:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]