Talk:Sarah Palin

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sarah Palin article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66: 30 days

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: This article is over 70kb long. Should it be broken up into sub-articles?

A1: The restriction mentioned in WP:SIZE is 60kB of readable prose, not the byte count you see when you open the page for editing. As of September, 2008, this article had about 4,100 words (approximately 26 KB) of text, well within the guideline. The rest is mainly citations and invisible comments, which do not count towards the limit.

Q2: Should the article have a criticisms/controversies section?

A2: A section dedicated to criticisms and controversies is no more appropriate than a section dedicated solely to praises and is an indication of a poorly written article. Criticisms/controversies/praises should be worked into the existing prose of the article. See also the essay on criticism.

Q3: Should the article include (one of various controversies/criticisms) if a reliable source can be provided? This article is a hit piece. Should the article include (various forms of generic praise for Palin) if a reliable source can be provided?

A3: Please try to assume good faith. Like all articles on Wikipedia, this article is a work in progress so it is possible for biases to exist at any point in time. If you see a bias that you wish to address, you are more than welcome to start a new discussion, or join in an existing discussion, but please be ready to provide sources to support your viewpoint and try to keep your comments civil. Starting off your discussion by accusing the editors of this article of having a bias is the quickest way to get your comment ignored.

Although it is certainly possible that the article has taken a wrong turn, please consider the possibility that the issue has already been considered and dealt with.

The verifiability policy and reliable source guideline are essential requirements for putting any material into the encyclopedia but there are other policies at work too. Material must also meet a neutral point of view and be a summary of previously published secondary source material rather than original research, analysis or opinion.

In addition, Wikipedia's Biography of living persons policy says that "views of critics should be represented if they are relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to side with the critics [or] give a disproportionate amount of space to critics". Perhaps there is simply no consensus to include the material...yet.

Also, the material might be here, but in a different article. The most likely place to find the missing material would be in an article on the 2008 presidential campaign. Including everything about Palin in a single article would exceed Wikipedia's article size restrictions. A number of sub-articles have been created and some controversies/criticisms/praises have been summarized here or been left out of this article altogether, but are covered in some detail in the sub-articles.

Q4: Should the article include (one of several recent controversies/criticisms/praises/rumors/scandals)? Such items should be covered in detail in the main article, not buried in a sub-article.

A4: Wikipedia articles should avoid giving undue weight to something just because it is in the news right now. If you feel that the criticism/controversy/praise is not being given enough weight in this article, you can try to start a discussion on the talk page about giving it more. See also the Wikipedia "BOLD, revert, discuss cycle".

Q5: If Wikipedia is supposed to be the encyclopedia anyone can edit, should I just be bold and fix any biases that I see in the article?

A5: It is true that Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit and no one needs the permission of other editors of this article to make changes to it. But Wikipedia policy is that, "While the consensus process does not require posting to the discussion page, it can be useful and is encouraged." This article attracts editors that have very strong opinions about Palin (either positive or negative) and these editors have different opinions about what should and should not be in the article, including differences as to appropriate level of detail. As a result of this it may be helpful, as a way to avoid content disputes, to seek consensus before adding contentious material to or removing it from the article.

Q6: Why is this page semi-protected (locked against new and anonymous users)?

A6: This page has been subject to a high volume of unconstructive edits, many coming from accounts from newer users who may not be familiar with Wikipedia's policies regarding neutrality, reliable sourcing and biographies of living people. In order to better maintain this page, editing of the main article by new accounts and accounts without a username has been temporarily disabled. These users are still able and encouraged to contribute constructively on this talk page.

Sarah Palin was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 25, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
June 22, 2015	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Former good article nominee

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.

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
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance).

Alaska High‑importance

	Alaska portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Alaska 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.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Beauty Pageants Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Beauty Pageants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of beauty pageants, their contestants and winners 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.Beauty PageantsWikipedia:WikiProject Beauty PageantsTemplate:WikiProject Beauty PageantsBeauty Pageants
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Arizona / Idaho / Presidential elections / Governors Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Arizona portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arizona (assessed as Low-importance).
	Idaho portal This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. governors (assessed as Low-importance).

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance 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

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Brian Krebs (August 29, 2008). "Wikipedia Edits Forecast Vice Presidential Picks". The Washington Post.
Yuki Noguchi (August 29, 2008). "Palin's Wikipedia Entry Gets Overhaul". NPR.
Chris O'Brien (August 29, 2008). "Tug of war over Wiki entry on Palin". San Jose Mercury News.
Natalie Weinstein (August 30, 2008). "Sarah Palin Wikipedia edits--fast and furious". CNET News.
Noam Cohen (September 1, 2008). "Don't Like Palin's Wikipedia Story? Change It". The New York Times.
Jemima Kiss (September 1, 2008). "Sarah Palin's immensely flattering Wikipedia entry". The Guardian.
Mike Harvey (September 1, 2008). "Sarah Palin Wikipedia entry gets glowing make-over from mysterious user Young Trigg". The Times.
Roberto Reale (September 2, 2008). "Wikipedia e la biografia "ripulita" di Sarah Palin". RAI.
Mark Sabbatini (September 2, 2008). "Wikipedia war emerges over details about Palin". Juneau Empire.
Iain Simons (September 2, 2008). "Who scrubbed Palin clean?". New Statesman.
Andrew Sullivan (September 15, 2008). "The Odd Lies Of Sarah Palin II: The Bridge To Nowhere". The Daily Dish.
Stephanie Condon (September 17, 2008). "Sarah Palin winning the Wikipedia popularity contest". CNET News.
Farhad Manjool (September 22, 2008). "Why Google's online encyclopedia will never be as good as Wikipedia". Slate.
Noam Cohen (November 9, 2008). "Updating a Reference Site on the Fly". The New York Times.
(none) (August 17, 2009). "The 50 most-viewed Wikipedia articles in 2009 and 2008". The Daily Telegraph.
Andy Miller (October 10, 2013). "Welcome to Anchorpedia". Anchorage Press.
Rhiannon Ruff (March 6, 2024). "Why Wikipedia can be a PR problem for political campaigns". PR Daily. Retrieved March 6, 2024.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2008.

Business insider is a Pulitzer Prize winning website. It says that Sarah Palin Probably Staged A Gigantic Hoax About Being Trig's Mother.

Why the wiki page on Sarah Palin wouldn't say a single word about this ?

https://www.businessinsider.com/sarah-palin-baby-hoax-2011-4 192.121.102.220 (talk) 07:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Current language: She also opposes abortion, including in cases of rape, incest, and embryonic stem cell research, but supports it if the mother's life is in jeopardy. She supports parental consent as a requirement for female minors seeking an abortion.

Proposed language: She opposes abortion, unless the mother's life is in jeopardy, and also opposes embryonic stem cell research. She supports parental consent as a requirement for minors seeking an abortion.

Reason for proposed change: current wording is confusing, implying that embryonic stem cell research is a reason to seek an abortion. 2601:6C1:102:D9E0:77E9:DC9F:907A:4361 (talk) 22:25, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Agreed that the previous wording was confusing. I didn't adopt your exact suggestion, but I think I cleared up the ambiguity. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 18:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have been some sort of error

Can someone fix the page? 2804:18:150:3B07:F4F8:EA2:8507:D375 (talk) 19:37, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Current language:Ryan Rudominer, a spokesman for the House Democratic campaign operation, called her involvement in various U.S. House campaigns a "great thing across the board".^[1]

Proposed language: After multiple Palin-endorsed candidates lost in house races, a spokesman for the House Democratic campaign operation, Ryan Rudominer, called her involvement a "great thing across the board".^[2]

Reason: Without context the statement could be interpreted as endorsement of Palin which it isn't (before checking the source I thought that he might be referring to her trying to get more women elected). Therefore the edit is needed for accuracy and NPOV.

Source: The context is drawn from the same source as the original sentence. 94.31.113.186 (talk) 09:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Day Creature (talk) 22:47, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^ Davis, Susan (June 10, 2010). "Measuring the Impact of a Nod From Palin". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on July 31, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2010.
^ Davis, Susan (June 10, 2010). "Measuring the Impact of a Nod From Palin". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on July 31, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2010.

[1] Davis, Susan (June 10, 2010). "Measuring the Impact of a Nod From Palin". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on July 31, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2010.

[2] Davis, Susan (June 10, 2010). "Measuring the Impact of a Nod From Palin". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on July 31, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2010.

[1]

[2]