Talk:Huma Abedin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

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:

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

Marital status with Anthony Weiner[edit]

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

Divorce Was Cancelled[edit]

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]

POV check!?!?!?![edit]

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]

Article contradicts itself on her marital status[edit]

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]

Occupation[edit]

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]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Huma_Abedin&oldid=1212543471"