Talk:Jill Billings

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removal of the section discussing her opponent's attack on her religious activities

I thought it was the most interesting aspect of the race, since usually Democrats are attacked for not being sufficiently active Christians. Comments by others? --Orange Mike | Talk 21:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this was the interesting part of the race. Since this was cover by the news media the section should be put back in-thank you-RFD (talk) 21:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with the campaign, but it is right to removed unsourced content like this especially in light of WP:BLP (for the opponent). If reliable sources are added supporting the paragraph and quotes removed in this diff then it should be restored. A campaign strategy (or an opponents) is encyclopedic and the content appears to have neutral tone. Royal broil 04:28, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it received a fair amount of news coverage it would seem to me that it could be included in the article, as it likely played an important role in the election. Of course, it should have a reliable source and be unbiased.Packerfansam (talk) 07:13, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't unsourced; it was properly sourced to a report in the major local daily newspaper! --Orange Mike | Talk 13:51, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]