Talk:Hope Hicks

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 October 2018 and 12 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: CensorshipStudent123!.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

"Played on a club lacrosse program she helped start"

This is trivial information and can't possibly meet Wikipedia's criteria for relevance for an adult woman who once served in government and was just appointed to be on the Fulbright board. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0C:5A80:1F06:AF00:B0EC:212E:1991:8F50 (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Hicks' current position

Is Hicks still an official spokesperson for Trump now that he is president-elect? I thought her role was over once the campaign ended, but this source is one of many that still refer to her as Trump's press secretary. If she's talking to a pool reporter, she must still be his press secretary, at least until the inauguration, right?Kerdooskis (talk) 19:31, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

She's clearly still with Trump. We are in the midst of the transition, and I'm sure we'll find out what her future job is at some point. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:19, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Parents / grandparents

There is way, way way, too much info on her parents in this article about Hope Hicks. Her parents' articles are -> that way. Toddst1 (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Do we really need to destroy the flow of the article with the tag that you just applied? How is that helpful?

As to your subjective, personal view that there is too much info on her parents -- that's simply the personal view of one Wikipedia editor. But your personal view is at odds with the RSs. We know this, because it is RS articles about HER that present this information in the first place. I think the view of the RSs is more relevant than the view of any one Wikipedia editor. Especially when they are at odds with each other.

I would suggest the tag be removed, because it unnecessarily destroys the flow of the article (Todd could have simply made his suggestion here, without applying a disruptive tag to the article itself ... seriously, how many readers want to have their reading interrupted by his tag?). And also that the tag be removed for the reason I point to above, and since it is normal to give the background of parents, and especially interesting to give background of parents who had political jobs where the subject is a political person as she is here. --2604:2000:E016:A700:B5FF:B936:D6B1:D1D2 (talk) 22:14, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Maintenance tags are a part of how we improve articles. They are to remain on articles until either the issue is fixed or consensus says that they're not appropriate. Neither has happened, so I've restored the {{off-topic}} tag. Toddst1 (talk) 23:06, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The objections of Toddst1 don't hold water. The depth of the background material on the subject here is typical right across Wikipedia and does not go beyond what is perfectly routine. There is no basis for the tag and no basis for the deletion of the material. sirlanz 00:34, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Agree with sirlanz. 2604:2000:E016:A700:5432:F90:C980:766D (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Photo

Didn't we have another photo of her with Trump that showed her more clearly? Not sure why that was deleted. They were watching a vote on TV. Also - I guess the book cover image of her can't be used here? 2604:2000:E016:A700:5432:F90:C980:766D (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Is there not a government portrait that can be used for the infobox? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:31, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@Another Believer: No, there isn't an official portrait for her from the government. Corky 02:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Can someone more skilled in photos than I find a more focused, better quality photo that can be used for her infobox photo? Navarrocortez (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Nickname

Is it appropriate to mention that Hicks is referred to as "Hopie" by Trump [1][2]? I know nicknames by which people are universally known are included in BLPs, but this looks like it is specific to Trump. Does this warrant inclusion in the "personal life" section, or anywhere else, or is this just too trivial? Kerdooskis (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Too trivial. But that CNN reference says that she types his tweets for him, at his dictation, and THAT is interesting. I wonder if we can find a second, confirming source? --MelanieN (talk) 23:10, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Relationship With Corey Lewandowski

The above titled section of the Hope Hicks page is predicated upon an alleged affair between this young woman and a married man. The one trustworthy source cited in the section points to the fact that both persons deny any affair existed. The existence of the affair is predicated upon the discredited author Wolff's new book, which is unquestionably not a "trusted source" under Wikipedia's guidelines. Therefore, I suggest that the entire section in the Article page be deleted. It is defamatory & degrading to report she is an adulterer and transparently mean spirited given the political affiliations of the parties. - Knowsetfree (talk) 20:31, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I deleted the subsection heading as that gives WP:UNDUE weight to the whole alleged affair. As for whether or not it should stay at all, maybe it shouldn't. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:11, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I also have my doubts about whether this material should stay. However, several sources that predate Wolff's book discuss the allegations. The references used to cite the claim that Hicks and Lewandowski deny the affair do not actually say that. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

It's been in the news before, but appears to be that Sam Nunberg told the NY Post about it after the argument Lewandowski and Hicks had on the Upper East Side.[3] Then Trump filed suit against Nunberg[4] but he eventually dropped it. So, unverified speculation. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

As to Wolff and his book used as a source, the New York Times calls him a "Local Media Scourge" and Slate.com calls him "a Notoriously Unreliable Narrator" Even if it were true, the relevance would be hard to discern, but on its face it's an ad hominem attack against Hope & Corey in the context of unreliable sourcing. I vote against elimination of the section. -Knowsetfree (talk) 00:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I have removed the unsubstantiated allegations. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:10, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

(2 years later) It is very strange that Corey Lewandowski is not mentioned even a single time in this article. Didn't Hicks date him, and isn't he believed to have been behind Hicks's ousting from her job at the White House? It is mentioned in Michael Cohen's book. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 17:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

References

NYT article

Some new sources as of Feb 10/2017:

• A New York times profile article on her and how loyal she is to her demagogue boss.
• a similar profile article in the Guardian,
• another article in the Washington Post, and
• a Chicago Tribune profile. Lots of new sources today!104.163.148.25 (talk) 20:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Inadequate Paraphrase and Violation of NPOV Included in this Article

What originally caught my eye was this article's violation of a Neutral Point of View at the following point: "The demands of the campaign caused the breakup between her and her boyfriend of six years." While it is obvious that this is a case of stating an opinion as fact, a little research also reveals that this is a totally inadequate paraphrase of the following language found in the source: "The demands of the campaign reportedly caused the breakup between her and her boyfriend of six years." The only difference in this "paraphrase" is the Wikipedia sentence omitting the single word "reportedly." That omission results in a lack of neutrality. And the virtual verbatim "paraphrase" clearly violates Wikipedia's plagiarism policy. This article had best be scrutinized for further such violations. It might cause copyright problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drew.viles (talk • contribs) 06:44, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Resignation Announcement 28 Feb. 2018

The resignation has been announced, but is not yet effective. Please do not jump the gun in your edits.

References

Change under Career section

The following "blurb" needs to be deleted. It has nothing to do with her career, and is simply a quote of her praising Trump. This is not proper encyclopedic material...

In May 2017, in response to an article in The Washington Post that said that Trump had a habit of belittling those who work for him, Hicks issued the following statement:

President Trump has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000. He has built great relationships throughout his life and treats everyone with respect. He is brilliant with a great sense of humor ... and an amazing ability to make people feel special and aspire to be more than even they thought possible.[30] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.39.86 (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I agree, and have removed it. It does not appear to be a significant aspect to include in a biography. A biography shouldn't read like a series of news clippings. --Animalparty! (talk) 08:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits break wikipedia rules on neutral entries, in edits that both can be seen as bigoted and misogynistic .

Recent edits break wikipedia rules on neutral entries, in edits that both can be seen as bigoted and misogynistic .

update Infobox officeholder

Update Template:Infobox officeholder. X1\ (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done Infobox updated. NedFausa (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Derek Chauvin

I wikilinked Derek Chauvin because I think he measures up to GNG. Geo Swan (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hicks denied racial discrimination charges

In 2016, NBC News aired a story about the federal lawsuit charging the Trump organization with discrimination, and quoted Stanley Leibowitz, Fred Trump's rental agent, describing how Donald Trump and his father told Leibowitz not to rent apartments to black people. Hope Hicks was the spokesperson who denied the charges.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hme351wP2dk
Former Trump Rental Agent Describes Racist Policy
Rachel Maddow
MSNBC
Oct 25, 2016

11:33 Now the Trump campaign has made a formal response to NBC News on this story a spokeswoman hope Hicks says quote there's absolutely no merit to the allegations the suit was brought as part of a nationwide inquiry against a number of companies in the matter was ultimately settled without any finding of liability and without any admission of wrongdoing whatsoever.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/not-wanted-black-applicants-rejected-trump-housing-speak-out-n671966
'Not Wanted': Black Applicants Rejected for Trump Housing Speak Out
Oct. 25, 2016
By Cynthia McFadden, Anna Schecter and Hannah Rappleye

Trump denies the company discriminated against blacks.

"There is absolutely no merit to the allegations," his spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, said in an email to NBC News. "This suit was brought as part of a nationwide inquiry against a number of companies, and the matter was ultimately settled without any finding of liability and without any admission of wrongdoing whatsoever."

--Nbauman (talk) 04:15, 16 June 2020 (UTC)