Talk:First ladies and partners of California

Women in Red: First ladies (2017)

This article was created or improved during the First ladies edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Red project in December 2017. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles

California

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Jennifer Newsom as First Partner

Jennifer Newsom wants to be known as First Partner. I'm changing it in the infobox to reflect what the office is known as while her husband is Governor. We don't get to tell California what they can call the office . Please respect this and leave it alone. — Maile (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 February 2021

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus for a move at this time. BD2412 T 05:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

– MOS:JOBTITLES. Showiecz (talk) 14:04, 1 February 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. —Nnadigoodluck███ 21:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. SITH (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose all - These are proper nouns and proper (official and unofficial) titles. Keep the capitalizations. Scanlan (talk) 13:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, Scanlan, they are not proper nouns. That much is made explicit in the very first sentence of WP:JOBTITLES. Literally every English language style guide I have ever encountered says it is wrong to capitalize plural forms. Surtsicna (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:JOBTITLES, The Chicago Manual of Style, AP Stylebook, the University Oxford Style Guide, the Cambridge Guide to Australian English Usage, and just about every other English language style guide in the world. It is also only natural for these articles to be consistent with List of governors of California, List of presidents of India, List of presidents of Lithuania, etc. Surtsicna (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Typo fixed in above message HouseBlaster^talk 19:18, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per editor Surtsicna. These are definitely not proper nouns, titles or names and should be decapped. P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 17:25, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- As for the later additions:

oppose. There is no need to rename the categories, they are already in accord with the style guideline.
oppose. First Lady of the United States should remain at that name, it is a person's title and therefore a proper noun phrase.
support. First Ladies of Hawaii → First ladies and partners of Hawaii

P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 22:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose all - MOS:JOBTITLES needs an overall, that's for sure. GoodDay (talk) 18:28, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On what grounds are you opposing? According to which style guides should these be capitalized? Surtsicna (talk) 18:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per MOS:JOBTITLES. MOS:JOBTITLES is the current consensus; we should follow it. HouseBlaster^talk 19:18, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom; these are not proper nouns. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 00:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Showiecz, HouseBlaster, Surtsicna, and Paine Ellsworth: Since we're talking about MOS:JOBTITLES, don't you guys think that we should move all capitalised "speaker"s like the one on this article: List of Speaker of the United States House of Representatives elections? —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 05:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "speaker" in that case is a common noun. P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 19:59, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support all per widely accepted guidance of avoiding unnecessary caps and the particulars of MOS:JOBTITLES. Dicklyon (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to First Spouse of Foo. Specific title held by one person at a time, so should be capitalised. No need for it to be plural. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Urm, these are not articles about one person at a time, these are lists, and as such the article titles are inherently plural, aren't they? P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 18:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - If they are simple lists (and most of them seem to be more than that) then they should be moved to "List of..." in any case! But that's not the proposal. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - keep as is. I've added Hawaii and the United States to the lists at the top of this page.

The First Lady of the United States is an official title and should not be lowercase. "Alphabetical List of First Ladies of the United States - Guides, Reference Aids, and Finding Aids (Prints andPhotographs ReadingRoom, Library of Congress)".
First Partner of California is currently the official title, and should not be lowercase."First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom". California Governor.

We need to use the terminology and capitalization standards of the government the individual is listed for. It would be an over-reach for Wikipedia to overturn any government's style in either terminology or capitalization. — Maile (talk) 15:23, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support lowercase per MOS:JOBTITLES: Plurals like these are groups of multiple people and thus common nouns and should not be capitalized. — BarrelProof (talk) 16:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think a lot of y'all are strongly misunderstanding MOS:JOBTITLES. Take a closer read at it. It certainly does not say that any of these have to be lowercase when used as article titles. In fact, it says that there are certainly instances in which these titles should be capitalized. SecretName101 (talk) 20:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose all per discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose all per above discussion and discussion at Talk:Second_Ladies_and_Gentlemen_of_the_United_States#Requested_move_31_January_2021, per my rationale there if we change the title to the proposal we have to move every "first lady" and "second lady" articles which is a lot to move. They misinterpreted MOS:JOBTITLES which talks about and gives examples of sentences on the article rather than the article title itself. PyroFloe (talk) 04:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Google ngrams show that "First Ladies" is more common than "First ladies" and "first ladies", which contradicts the notion that least this plural title should not be capitalized.
If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed.-- WP:TITLECHANGES
There is no reason to change this title, let alone a good reason. --В²C ☎ 23:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose all per Maile, as well as B2C's evidence for COMMONNAME. This is an area where MOS:JOBTITLES doesn't enjoy the community consensus that most areas of the MOS do. It fails to recognize that when something is an actual job title, which these names are, then it acts as a proper noun. It's not necessarily wrong to decap it, and doubtless some organs do, but a majority still treat job titles this way, even in plural or modified form, and it's not wrong for us to go with the majority. — Amakuru (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Three collapsed discussions and notes

Later additions by Maile66

Later additions by Maile66 (talk):

Category:Spouses of United States state governors← more complete list of US state lists
Category:Spouses of American politicians
Category:Spouses of leaders of the United States
First Lady of the United States
First Ladies of Hawaii → First ladies and partners of Hawaii"leaders

Discussion regarding ineligible nominator withdrawal

Withdraw based on above. Showiecz (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: At this point, PyroFloe declared the RM as withdrawn:

The result of the move request was: WITHDRAWN, based on below. Showiecz (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC), formally closing as nominator withdrew, Closed by PyroFloe (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@PyroFloe and Showiecz: this move has not been closed properly it is still showing up in WP:RM. (t · c) buidhe 21:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
buidhe, hopefully that fixes it. PyroFloe (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I then reopened the discussion. Per WP:RMCI, RM discussions should not be withdrawn, except "if no one has commented yet, or if opposition is unanimous". This does not apply here, so I reverted the declaration of withdrawal. In fact, there have been more expressions of support than opposition. The discussion should continue below until closed properly by an uninvolved editor (preferably an admin). — BarrelProof (talk) 04:35, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reversal, or at least revert, of close requested

See: User talk:StraussInTheHouse#Close at First_ladies_and_partners_of_California --В²C ☎ 08:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reversed, reopened and relisted. SITH (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)As noted on the above linked thread, several pages were moved and should be moved back. The original request to move the pages was withdrawn. Therefore nullifying the requests to move pages. None of them should have been moved. — Maile (talk) 13:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved, closure was in accordance with guidelines but I've accepted I made an incorrect determination of consensus. SITH (talk) 13:32, 28 February 2021 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:First Ladies and Gentlemen of Kansas which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution of the role

This article should include a history of the role and current importance. For instance does the person have official/unofficial duties and budget and how has this changed over time? When was the title first used? I couldn't find any use of it in a quick google book search before 1915 (a historic newspaper search showed 1903 for first usage). Erp (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Erp that is an excellent point. You might want to mention this at WT:WOMRED. In 2017, that project had an editathon to improve the articles on First Ladies around the world. — Maile (talk) 19:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]