Talk:Huma Abedin

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Huma Abedin 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination: keep, 23 November 2015, see discussion. Keep, 24 March 2010, see discussion. Keep, 1 November 2007, see discussion.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government 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). Politics: American Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance). Saudi Arabia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia 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.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Asian Americans Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Asian Americans (assessed as Low-importance). 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

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened: August 28 to September 3, 2016 (14th) October 23 to 29, 2016 (25th) October 30 to November 5, 2016 (5th)

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: http://www.vogue.com/13464218/huma-abedin-family-job-hillary-clinton-campaign-strategist/ – should be used in much greater depth than it is currently http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/huma-abedin-clinton-wikileaks-229914

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Huma Abedin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121209033722/http://www.adl.org/PresRele/DiRaB_41/6356_41.htm to http://www.adl.org/PresRele/DiRaB_41/6356_41.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131207071155/http://www.grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/Grassley-Letter0001.pdf to http://www.grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/Grassley-Letter0001.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:05, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure who has an agenda here, but Huma is most certainly still the legal spouse of Anthony Weiner, and this article pretty clearly attempts to whitewash that fact using weasel words such as "separated" or "filed for divorce." Their divorce proceedings, if they even still are ongoing, are apparently not going anywhere. The article should reflect that Huma and Anthony Weiner are a lawfully married couple today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.14.49.57 (talk) 11:34, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the article contradicts the assertion that they are legally married, and to add more text about the fact that the divorce has not gone through seems undue unless there are sources that discuss it. --bonadea contributions talk 11:53, 30 April 2018

Page Six is indirectly backed by the fact that they cancelled the required court proceedings.2601:447:4101:41F9:2996:B16:1014:3501 (talk) 20:04, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what you think it's "backed by," anonymous sources in a gossip column are never acceptable sources in Wikipedia. WP:RS and WP:BLP are not negotiable. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 20:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your idea of "not negotiable" is laughable.2601:447:4101:41F9:71C5:A30F:F95A:75CB (talk) 23:09, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good Grief... "In early 2017, Abedin announced her intent to file for divorce with sole physical custody of their son. On May 19, 2017, after he pled guilty, she filed for divorce.[74] Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner withdrew their divorce case from court in January 2018, stating that they decided to settle the divorce privately in order to spare their six year-old son further"...

The fact is that HUMA withdrew her divorce claim from court, NOT Anthony because he didn't Counter file For damages against her - did he? However besides this...It really sounds here like any real divorce was never even a requirement since Bill Clinton who married them wasn't ever previously known to be qualified to marry anyone but still felt it was necessary to buy the bride a $100,000.00 wedding dress for a wedding no one attended. I am going to remove Anthony's name from the above sentence since it is a convolution of the truth.96.49.69.200 (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

POTUS has the authority to marry people. Governors, mayors, also do. Even after they leave office. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:21, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Really think this article should be POV checked. Lot of partisan conservative leaning content. A lot. Strong perception these edits are not npov. Lot of effort on specific content that favors a specific political leaning. Tried to tag but tag was arbitrarily removed 0pen$0urce (talk) 04:24, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@0pen$0urce: You last edited this article in 2016. Please identify specific issues with the article, specific content that you think is biased. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Meant to edit here. Working on it. What are you contributing other than commenting on other editors.....?Literally the tag just went up so everyone who is watching this article alerts are going off. Maybe add to the discussion instead of trying to run off an editor. This Kind of stuff was talked about by jimbo and how editors are run off. What bearing does 2 years ago have, the article still appears to have POV issues with POV contributions. Let’s discuss the article not the contributors.

Wow, how about slowing down, focus the the discussion on the content not the editor. You know good faith edits etcetra... 0pen$0urce (talk) 04:30, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned tagging the article, so I looked in your edit history and saw that you tagged it in June 2016. So I wonder what issues you are talking about, because the article has changed in the last two and a half years. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Still commenting on me even checking edit history. Again wp:agf0pen$0urce (talk) 02:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As of the date of this Comment, the little box under her photo at top rights says she divorced Anthony Weiner in 2018, while the article says that as of 2021 their divorce is NOT finalized. C'mon, Wikipedia! If her divorce is not final, the "div." in the box needs to be changed to whatever is consistent with any other Wikipedia subject who is in the process of getting a divorce. Why would you want to say she's divorced when she's not? Are we using Wikipedia in a partisan way to help her clean up her image?2600:8804:8800:11F:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 04:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

To describe Human Abedin's occupation as "political staffer" is inadequate since she is a New York Times best-selling author, worked as an editor of a scholarly journal for 12 years, and worked in government as Senior Advisor to a United States Senator for eight years and as Deputy Chief of Staff in the U.S. State Department for four. She was most recently the Vice-Chair of the Forbes 30/50 International Women's Day Summit in Abu Dhabi (a consulting, organizing position, I assume.) Unlike some other notable political operatives who receive far better write ups, such as James Carville and Donna Brazile, Abedin has substantive government experience. Given all her achievements, Abedin is much more than a "political staffer," which sounds like a lowly position on a campaign. A.T.S. in Texas (talk) 03:53, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]