Talk:Thomas Jefferson: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 599:

::'''Agree''' that the lead should not mention the Hemmings business. Jefferson was famous for scores of reasons - the Declaration of Independence, his political offices, his writings, etc. If no one had heard of whatever happened between him and Hemmings, he would still be extremely notable. Including info about her in the lead is both [[WP:UNDUE|undue weight]] and a [[WP:RECENTISM|disproportionate focus on present-day concerns]]. Hemmings's lead paragraph should mention Jefferson (he's the only reason she's notable), but his should not mention her. --[[User:Coemgenus|Coemgenus]] 13:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

:::Given the amount of attention paid to the subject in recent years, I think it's appropriate to mention it briefly in the lede. The current (11:30, 24 January 2011) edit by Ebanony looks about right to me. [[User:WCCasey|WCCasey]] ([[User talk:WCCasey|talk]]) 23:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

::::Much of the controversy has been overstated, as was evidenced here, and orchestrated by agenda driven interests. That is the only viable explanation for the preoccupation over something that has had zero effect on Jefferson's role in history. There are 25 different Jefferson males who could have also been the father. Why do some individuals hope/insist it was TJ? -- In any event it has been reduced from near paragraph size to a sentence that is worded acceptably, however, it still can be argued if it belongs in the lead at all, given the gigantic events it is mentioned along side of, giving it '''undue weight'''. -- [[User:Gwillhickers|Gwillhickers]] ([[User talk:Gwillhickers|talk]]) 01:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)