Talk:Elizabeth Colbert Busch

Notability

I appreciate the reasoning behind the creation of this article, but I'm not sure the subject is notable, as even the headlines say "Colbert's sister". Notability is not inherited, and if not for her being Stephen's sister, I doubt anyone would care. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you think this still applies? The article cites articles on her from the Washington Post, Slate, Politico, and other well-known news sources. Her candidacy seems to be gathering a lot of intention in the US media, so I'd say this reaches the notability guideline. Moxfyre (ǝɹʎℲxoɯ | contrib) 19:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I dunno. She's only getting coverage because of her brother, but it is coverage nonetheless. To me, it's a grey area in WP:INHERITED. I am pretty sure this article would survive an AfD via either a keep or no consensus decision, so I have no objection at this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

FYI, I nominated this article at DYK. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Forget her familial relationship; we ought to be able to collect and examine congressional candidates' information within wikipedia. I concede it'll always be tougher to maintain NPOV on candidate pages, but it merits a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.126.50.67 (talk) 01:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

• That's not really how we do things here. Just being a candidate isn't enough to get a page, which is why we don't have pages for the hundreds of failed candidates that are fielded every year. If someone has a lot of coverage but it's only for one event WP:ONEEVENT applies and it should be redirected to the election page. This case is borderline in my view. -LtNOWIS (talk) 15:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• The Democratic nominee who won the primary and who is the sister of a late-night talk show host in one of the only elections happening right now anywhere in a traditionally Republican district against a former Governor that left office to divorce his wife and marry his Argentinian mistress, that is not the sort of minor blip that ONEEVENT covers. She has received national media attention, and she will continue at least until the election is over. Discussions about whether a topic is notable enough for Wikipedia are called WP:AfDs. If you don't think the topic is notable, file an AfD, talking about it here isn't going to change or resolve anything. I doubt this article would ever be deleted through AfD, but at least when it was closed we could put some punctuation here. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 17:17, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• Being a "sacrificial lamb" candidate in an election fails ONEEVENT, regardless of who her brother is or that it's a special election or that her possible opponent once "hiked the Appalachian trail". It's the depth and breadth of coverage that matters. Not every party nominee for Congress deserves an article. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• You're right, my point was meant to be that it is highly unlikely that all of those factors together would lead to a lack of breadth and depth of coverage (2560 recent entries in Google News). Even a "regular" special election outside of an election cycle will make political journalists froth at the mouth. And my actual point is that if it isn't notable, take it to AfD, because discussion won't make it notable or resolve anything. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 17:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• Yes. I didn't mean to suggest that this one should be deleted, though I think we should all acknowledge that in a district such as this one, where one party dominates the other, the nominee of the losing party is usually not a notable individual. This is a special case. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

this sentence in the lede

"to fill the seat vacated by Tim Scott upon his appointment to the U.S. Senate to fill the seat vacated by Jim DeMint." True beauty Jonathanfu (talk) 08:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT – Muboshgu (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Elizabeth Colbert-Busch, not Elizabeth Colbert Busch ?

This page at the Clemson University site gives many hits that give her name as the hyphenated Elizabeth Colbert-Busch. Yet our article's title omits the hyphen, as if her last name were Busch, and the article repeatedly refers to her as Colbert Busch, as if Colbert were her first name. Could someone who knows how to move the article to Elizabeth Colbert-Busch please do so (and put the hyphens into the article too)? Duoduoduo (talk) 11:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

On the other hand, she has a contribution website here that doesn't use the hyphen. So maybe state records of her name change when she got married would give the correct answer. This Ballotpedia site hyphenates it. Duoduoduo (talk) 14:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

This site of the South Carolina State Election Commission does not hyphenate it. Duoduoduo (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Arrest Record

Hello- An IP address user has twice removed content relating to Colbert's arrest record. I undid his revisions, but don't want to start an edit war, so I want to make sure the information should be included. It is properly cited, and I do feel it has to do with Colbert Busch. I just wanted to make sure. PrairieKid (talk) 02:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Elizabeth Colbert Busch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130122010122/http://news.yahoo.com:80/stephen-colberts-sister-plots-house-run-south-carolina-211546680--abc-news-politics.html to http://news.yahoo.com/stephen-colberts-sister-plots-house-run-south-carolina-211546680--abc-news-politics.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:24, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Colbert Busch. 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/20130120111656/http://gawker.com:80/5977213/stephen-colberts-sister-joins-race-for-congressional-seat-vacated-by-south-carolina-senator-tim-scott to http://gawker.com/5977213/stephen-colberts-sister-joins-race-for-congressional-seat-vacated-by-south-carolina-senator-tim-scott

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 19:08, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

The lead section has the same information twice

I think the cleanest option is to remove the second paragraph of the lead. Airbornemihir (talk) 11:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)