Talk:C. J. Cregg/Archive 1

Archive 1

"Speedy Deletion???"

What POSSIBLE reason could there be for this article to be "a candidate for speedy deletion"??? That's just absolute nonsense. Somebody needs to get off of their high horse, in my opinion. There's nothing wrong with the article that makes it worthy of deletion, at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.200.152 (talk) 03:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It's referring to the photo of C.J., not the article itself. --Hnsampat (talk) 03:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh (*blush*) Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.200.152 (talk) 02:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

New photo from later in the series is needed. I don't know how do it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.213.216.115 (talk) 08:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

"A Full Lid"

I know this isn't the right place to ask this, so sorry. Could anyone explain what CJ means when she says, at the end of most press conferences, "That's a full lid". Is this a media term?

A "full lid" is shorthand for saying that there will be no more news coming out of the White House for the day. It's a real term that has been used by White House Press Secretaries in briefings. Shoemoney2night (talk) 00:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Doctorate

There is an episode in which she referenced earning a doctorate at Berkeley, and hence this later makes her a viable candidate to head the Kennedy School of Government in the final episodes.

I have never heard her say anywhere that she earned a doctorate. In fact, the fact that she is still referred to, through the end of the series, as "Ms. Cregg" and not "Dr. Cregg" suggests that she never earned a doctorate. Could you please cite the exact episode where this is said? In the meantime, I'm going to temporarily revert your edit. --Hnsampat 13:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

hair colour change?

why is her hair suddenly darker in colour? Bwithh 00:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Succession box

Do we really need a succession box for a position of which there has only ever been one known occupant? DJ Clayworth 17:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

"Access"

I've deleted the following text from the 5th paragraph:

"Although a fifth season mockumentary episodes describes C.J. as the only press secretary to have served out two full terms under the same president, in fact..."

I just watched the episode ("Access"), and the specific line is, "[Cregg] remains the only woman to have served two terms as the White House Press Secretary." It doesn't say she served two full terms, and it seems that the emphasis was on her as a woman. I think the script is sufficiently vague that there isn't need to claim there is a continuity problem. --Eirishis 14:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Catholic?

She's listed as List of Fictional Catholics, but this doesn't appear in the text. I don't recall anything about this from the show, could someone describe with citation? -Thucydides —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.169.185.188 (talk) 03:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

In "The Crackpots and These Women," the fifth episode of the first season, Josh is listening to Ave Maria (by Schubert, I think) and he asks C.J. if she's ever heard it. She replies, "I'm Catholic" (presumably as a way of saying, "Of course I've heard it"). --Hnsampat 03:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Other Relationships

In 4x13 The Long Goodbye, CJ goes home to Ohio for a class reunion and has a fling with Marco Arlens. In mid season 5, around episode 5x15 Full Disclosure, she had a relationship with Ben, the forrest ranger. How long it lasted is unclear. Also, a more intimate relationship between CJ and Toby was alluded to in episode 7x21 Institutional Memory when CJ went to see Toby about the pardon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.158.197 (talk)

Yes, but we don't necessarily need to add that to the article. We don't necessarily need to detail C.J.'s entire love life, although we could if we wanted to. Also, I personally think there's nothing to the Toby-C.J. thing, but in any case it's speculation at best. --Hnsampat (talk) 13:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Episodes

IMDB is not always a reliable source. However when it comes to episode lists and cast lists it almost always is, because they are checked by the administrators, instead of submitted by the public. Therefore I maintain that the statement I added is probably correct. It is certainly more likely to be correct than the completely unsourced statement which was there before, and to which my addition was reverted. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Appearances

It says C.J. appears in all episodes except 17. People, however she also doesn't appear in Opposition Research, King Corn, La Palabra, Message of the Week, The Debate, Running Mates, Two Weeks Out or Welcome To Wherever You Are. I don't know whether it should be changed to say she appears in all but 9 episodes or whether to leave it out completely. ObsessedWithTV (talk) 19:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Removed speculation

I've removed the following paragraphs:

In the final two episodes of Season 6, in a plotline involving an oxygen leak aboard the International Space Station, a senior White House official leaked information to the New York Times about a top-secret military space shuttle that could lead to the rescue of the astronauts if none of NASA's shuttles could be readied in time. After the cliffhanger at the end of the season, many fans speculated that C.J. could be the leaker, something that, if confirmed, could result in her facing Federal charges and a possible prison sentence of up to 10 years.

The incident is probably used to mirror the Valerie Plame scandal in which the identity of the CIA wife of Iraq War critic former-ambassador Joseph C. Wilson was leaked by top Bush staffers. It is important to note that the show suggest White House Chief of Staff C.J. Cregg is implied of the leak, this is parallel in real life in which Bush’s chief political advisor Karl Rove is implied of the leak. Also like in real life, the leak had to do with a New York Times reporter, in the real life leak journalist Judith Miller served time in prison for not collaborating with a Grand Jury to reveal the name of the source, this is also mirrored in the West Wing where the reporter involved with the leak would not name his source for the sake of confidentiality to protect the source.

At the end of the episode Mr. Frost, it was revealed that Toby Ziegler was in fact the leak.

They're unsupported speculation, as far as I can tell, and since CJ wasn't the leak, they're now also irrelevant.--chris.lawson 04:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy is clear and must be followed

Material without reliable sources cannot remain in articles, even - and especially - if the subject never existed. This policy on reliable sources is not negotiable. I liked the West Wing but we must remember that CJ Cregg never lived, nor did anyone else on this fictional show. Thus, where she was "born" or what she "did" is irrelevant. Please read the article "What Wikipedia is not" for discussion of notability, in-universe and indiscriminate information. What you saw on your DVD is not a source.Catherinejarvis (talk) 17:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy is subject to consensus; look at Meredith Grey. a good article, or Preston Burke, a B-Class article. Both have information on the character's background...Go Phightins! 02:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

The article on Meredith Grey is good - as you have shown - because the many different sources exist in the real world. The sources for CJ Cregg are simply other Wikipedia articles, which are themselves unsourced.Catherinejarvis (talk) 22:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:C. J. Cregg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 09:49, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Prose

Lede

• inspired by Dee Dee Myers, - give the name an adjective Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
• twice for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series and Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series each - winning X and Y twice is a bit easier to read. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Both done! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 18:44, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

General

• character is said to have been partially inspired - said to be? Who did? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  I'm not sure current guidelines require in-text attribution for this one, as it's clearly cited to Crawley 2006. Pretty much every attribution maintenance template I could find (see {{Attribution needed}} and {{by whom}}) specify that it shouldn't be used if there's already a source. I can rephrase it to sidestep this, if you'd like. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  I meant more that we shouldn't say "said to", perhaps "character may have been partially inspired by..." Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  possibly, but then the next sentence (in which Sorkin strongly denies it) looks a little weird, since we haven't said that that idea had some traction in the press/books. Maybe "reportedly"? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:45, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

  i mean, if it's weasel words you're worried about, my understanding is that that rule doesn't really apply where a direct inline citation is provided to show that it really is said to be like that. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:54, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• The pantsuit would have a neutral - would have? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Done! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:40, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• (who has Alzheimer's disease) - is this relevant Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Well, the source thought to include it—my guess is that it's an allusion to the fact that Alzheimer's comes with a steady degradation of motor skills. The father, who has it, shows no difficulty as C. J. fumbles with the fishing line. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 18:47, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• "Allison is just going to be a break-out, huge part of this show".[ - this could be said without a quote. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  It could, but do you have a specific issue with the quote? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:17, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  More that we should limit them. Could just say that he was looking to use her in the series more. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:37, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  @Lee Vilenski: rephrased that quote, addressed the other two theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• The article uses "C.J." a lot, rather than the characters last name. Any reason? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  yeah; it's her common name on the show and in reliable sources, which is what's supposed to be used for fictional characters per MOS:LASTNAME. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 18:49, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• depth,[19][20][21][22] - can we do some WP:BUNDLING? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Done! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:35, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• "standard office-gal trope" of "bitchiness and hysteria" - this seems a bit irrelevant. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Hmm, I'm not sure I agree—it's meant to communicate that while C. J. is (viewed as) as a smart and tough and witty character, she's also not immune to misogynist tropes that show up frequently in Sorkin's writing, including The West Wing, particularly its female characters. The idea that women are too emotional for rational political work is one of those tropes, which is what Elle is conveying here. Would you like a rephrase? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 18:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• The Cincinnati Enquirer wrote - who from the Enquirer? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Well, John Kiesewetter, but I'm not seeing anything in WP:INTEXT that would require that specificity (although I'm happy to make the change anyway). theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 18:57, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• Highest on their list of 144 characters... - was this a list of best characters/favourite characters/most likely to annoy people list? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  specified :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:41, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• In 2022, The Santa Fe New Mexican reported that John Blair, newly appointed city manager of Santa Fe, New Mexico, owns a dog named C. J. Cregg with his husband.[71] - seems like Trivia to me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  A little, but it does play into the well-acknowledged theme that The West Wing has a heck-of-a-bunch of influence on real-life politicians. I'm happy to remove it if you feel strongly, honestly. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:13, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Maybe more suitable to the West wing article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:37, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  fair enough, I've moved the sentence to Talk:C. J. Cregg theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• Check the see also section, it shouldn't contain anything already listed in the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Fixed that one! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:17, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Review meta comments

• I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:49, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  Sounds good, thanks so much! I call dibs on reviewing cowboy pool if no one snaps it up—but to avoid the worst of a QPQ appearance on either of our ends, I'm more comfortable waiting until this review is resolved to begin my own review. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  @Lee Vilenski: first sweep adressed :) best wishes, theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 20:02, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Works for me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:40, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Thanks so, so much! :D theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 07:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)