Talk:Cindy McCain

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleCindy McCain 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
February 22, 2009Good article nomineeListed

fi:Cindy McCain[edit]

ad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.23.118.192 (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone did it. Wasted Time R (talk) 16:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

birthdate[edit]

two separate year of births.....1954 and 1955. which one is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.0.193.206 (talk) 14:34, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The '1955' was the year Hensley & Co. was founded. But that date isn't that important in this context, so I removed it, so that its proximity doesn't cause confusion. Wasted Time R (talk) 16:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Affairs and NE[edit]

Should the recent stories of her affairs that have been published in the National Enquirer get some mention in this article? Seems pretty noteworth for a person of her stature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.238.90 (talk) 03:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. The National Enquirer is not a WP:RS. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Really, because they seemed to get the Edwards Affair correct. They gained a lot of cred with that, and for Cindy they even have pictures [1] 71.206.238.90 (talk) 15:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Really, they have no credibility, particularly at Wikipedia. They do get things right at times but more often, they are only reporting gossip which isn't Wikipedia-worthy. See my other comments below. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 21:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The NE gets their facts right more than WP does, so I don't really see why we should exclude them just because they come in tabloid format. Do you exclude anything that Faux News or the NY Post reports too?71.206.238.90 (talk) 12:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia isn't considered a reliable source and therefore can not be used for citation. The news divisions of Fox news and the NY Post are considered reliable sources -- if their assertions are extraordinary, then they can be balanced with other reliable sources. This is all explained at how Wikipedia uses reliable sources -- I strongly recommend that you read up on it. If you disagree with how Wikipedia uses reliable sources, then the proper venue would be the talk page of WP:RS. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 14:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you on Fox News, but I think you're being generous regarding the New York Post -- they've done some really shoddy work over the years. But in any case, as you say, the National Enquirer isn't even close to be a reliable source, Edwards notwithstanding. Wasted Time R (talk) 05:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.nationalenquirer.com/world_exclusive_cindy_mccain_caught_cheating_on_sen_john_mccain_with_other_man/celebrity/65736

Affair National Enquirer[edit]

Yes, I think the article should mention the supposed affair. Does anyone know if John McCain's responded yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danyale93 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC) I agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danyale93 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to wait until additional reliable sources support NE's allegations. NE is not a reliable source. Yes, they got the Edwards thing "right" but its allegations were not included in Wikipedia until after other reliable sources (well, actually, I would rate them as less than reliable -- they were Murdoch owned Times of London, but consensus disagreed) reported on it. You will have to wait. Don't bank on it -- because it got Edwards right (partially) it gets hundreds of things wrong. It has no reputation for fact checking or accuracy and isn't mainstream -- these are the requirements. Glad to see you agreed with yourself. ;) ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 21:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheerleader, once more[edit]

Back to this, whose "[dubious – discuss]" status in the article has to be resolved. Previous discussions are at Talk:Cindy McCain/Archive 1#High school graduation date, when a cheerleader and Talk:Cindy McCain/Archive 1#Cheerleader redux. We've established that if she was a cheerleader in college, she would have to had to have been a USC Song Girl.

Turns out there's a good number of people who pay attention to USG Song Girls and their history, and none of them think Cindy Lou Hensley was one. See for example the thread at this discussion board from July 2008. Including a reproduced whole 1999 article from the Daily Trojan that profiles her time at the school and doesn't mention this. See for example the posts here, here, and here at a blog site by a USC reporter for the Los Angeles Daily News, also from July 2008. His final conclusion: "Apparently, she was never a song girl." And at several other sites I saw that discussed whether she was a Song Girl, none provided any evidence that she was and many expressed skepticism.

Bottom line is, the newspaper stories that we've cited on this are themselves contradictory (high school or college) and lack any quote from Cindy or telling detail that would convince us that they actually know this rather than just are repeating what they think is known. And there's substantial doubt about it, both from posters to these talk pages and from all the sites I've just listed. My gut feel is that it isn't true, or if it is, it's not in the form that we've been presenting it. Accordingly, I'm removing it. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Board Associations[edit]

Can we change her humanitarian board associations? She is no longer a sitting board member of Operation Smile or CARE. She is a still a member of HALO and is a founding member of Eastern Congo Initiative.---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlatcovich (talk • contribs) 02:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Do you have some media or webpage sources you can point to that verify this? Wasted Time R (talk) 02:24, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cindy McCain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cindy McCain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Cindy McCain. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 05:17, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Cindy McCain. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cindy_McCain&oldid=1212974488"