Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elizabeth Warren article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

	Elizabeth Warren has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result November 2, 2011 Good article nominee Listed March 4, 2013 Good article reassessment Kept
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 22, 2017, June 22, 2022, June 22, 2024, and June 22, 2025.
Current status: Good article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Politics and Government / Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance). U.S. Congress Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is about one (or many) Person(s). Oklahoma Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance). United States: Massachusetts / Presidential elections Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance). University of Houston (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Houston, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.University of HoustonWikipedia:WikiProject University of HoustonTemplate:WikiProject University of HoustonUniversity of Houston University of Pennsylvania Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of University of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject University of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Pennsylvania Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women Women in Red: #1day1woman (2020) / #1day1woman (2021) This article was created or improved during the following events hosted by the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red #1day1woman initiative in 2020 #1day1woman initiative in 2021 Women writers Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes Section size for Elizabeth Warren (38 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 10,769 10,769 316 316 Early life and education 10,573 10,573 370 370 Career 1,142 25,082 105 1,326 Academic 8,527 8,527 560 560 Advisory roles 4,930 4,930 162 162 TARP oversight 3,026 3,026 106 106 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 3,935 3,935 152 152 Political affiliation 3,522 3,522 241 241 U.S. Senate (2013–present) 348 48,066 9 1,611 Elections 16 12,979 0 444 2012 10,638 10,638 305 305 2018 1,204 1,204 85 85 2024 1,121 1,121 54 54 Tenure 21,752 21,752 970 970 Role in the 2016 presidential election 10,876 10,876 187 187 119th United States Congress Committee assignments 295 2,111 1 1 Current 1,816 1,816 0 0 2020 presidential campaign 9,437 21,088 404 983 Polls 2,034 2,034 174 174 Funding 5,139 5,139 196 196 Public appearances 2,145 2,145 108 108 Vice-presidential speculation 2,333 2,333 101 101 Personal life 4,647 4,647 126 126 Political positions 10,872 10,872 449 449 Ancestry and Native American claims 25,452 25,452 841 841 Honors and awards 7,825 7,825 197 197 In popular culture 6,086 6,086 0 0 Political influence and protégés 39 16,678 0 855 Influence on national politics 6,364 6,364 321 321 Protégés 4,341 4,341 130 130 Influence on appointments in Democratic presidential administrations 459 5,934 43 404 Pressuring of Hillary Clinton before the 2016 election 2,330 2,330 248 248 Biden administration 3,145 3,145 113 113 Books and other works 12,251 12,251 300 300 See also 267 267 0 0 References 475 475 0 0 Further reading 850 850 0 0 External links 5,390 5,390 0 0 Total 206,371 206,371 7,374 7,374

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: December 30, 2018 to January 5, 2019 March 1 to 7, 2020

This recent edit has a misstatement of the source[1] First of all it takes the "South American" thing out of context. The full quote is Bustamante has said that due to limited Native America databases, he compared Warren’s DNA sample to recent samples from indigenous populations in South America rather than Native Americans in the U.S., which does not say they weren't Native American. They were Native South American. Secondly the overall conclusion from the piece you gave was 'Not a yes or no answer' None of the experts and industry executives who spoke to ABC News -- including scientists who have worked with Bustamante -- directly refuted his conclusions. Instead, they contended that the underlying science is apt to be flawed because the Native American gene databases for tribes in the U.S. are so thin –- making conclusions like Bustamante's all but useless from a scientific perspective. "It's hard to say that there is a definitive conclusion, especially if someone has such small amounts of Native American ancestry," said Dr. Nanibaa’ Garrison, a faculty member in the Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics at Seattle Children’s Research Institute. "When you're testing someone who might have an ancestor more than four or five generations back, that's when it becomes very hard to piece out that ancestor from all the other ancestors that the person has," Garrison added. "It's not a yes or no answer." Andre🚐 23:06, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The wording implies that Bustamante said the evidence was definitive, when in fact he said it was strongly supportive of her claim. That's why there is a policy against using analysis by journalists as reliable sources. I support removing the text. TFD (talk) 10:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andrevan, the point is that Native Americans in the United States (specifically Cherokee people and Delaware people) and Indigenous peoples of the Americas#Central America and Indigenous peoples of the Americas#South America are not all interchangeable.

The point is that this, and other sources I can add, clarify that Warren claimed North American Native heritage, and the DNA test did not confirm that. But it's been misrepresented as if it did. That is the only point I want to make with these additions, as it continues to be a misconception about this incident. I can add other sources by geneticists that confirm the 23andMe database he used has no significant DNA from North American Native populations. That's why it was "useless" to confirm her claim; but she tried to do that, and people are still trying to do that. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 18:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The DNA test strongly supported Warren's claim of some small Native American admixture which gives evidence, but not conclusively, to her family story. Of course it doesn't prove that she was Cherokee or Delaware and I wasn't saying that all indigenous people are interchangeable, but that is how DNA research is done. They use stand-ins for different groups. But if there was something genetically similar to South American indigenous DNA in Warren's white European heritage, that gives some evidence (not proof) of her story. Beyond that you're veering into original research synthesis. The "useless" quote was taken out of context. It clearly states in the source that none of the experts refuted what Bustamante said, they simply said the science was flawed and inexact. Andre🚐 18:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Read the new source I've added. I'm not not trying to be mean here but you don't seem to be understanding how these tests work. Please also check out the Warren syllabus:

• SYLLABUS: ELIZABETH WARREN, CHEROKEE CITIZENSHIP, AND DNA TESTING

- CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 19:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The claim is false, the science is "inexact" and "flawed", and even if (big if) it was evidence of something it is not proof of anything, least of which her claim of Cherokee, Delaware or any other North American Native heritage. It is by the very definition of the term "useless" in proving the claim. --ARoseWolf 19:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The DNA test showed evidence that there was some historical basis for Warren's family story, which is not the same as a credible claim to Cherokee or Delaware tribal heritage. However the original edit I reverted was not as clear as the current article text. Right now it explains this complex issue in what I consider to be a reasonable and nuanced way. Before the implication was that the DNA test was useless - well, it's not useless full stop given the Donald Trump bet phrasing (which of course he did not honor). It might be useless for tribal sovereignty since that isn't how you get sovereignty for a tribe. But it has a usage. It shows that the family story that Warren grew up with wasn't just a fabrication, but based on something historical. Without weighing in on whether it was proper to talk about the way Warren did. Andre🚐 20:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can understand it, you've addressed my issue. I'm fine with the latest edit as it seems to capture the issues that I was objecting to with the first edit, so I'm going to leave it alone and let it stand for now. Andre🚐 20:24, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Muboshgu: While Warren has more recently walked back her claim to be fully Native American, the category is for those who claim "Native American Descent". This is different. After the many meetings during the campaigns she admitted she's not a citizen of a Nation (which Native Americans already knew), and has no tribal ties (ditto), but she still makes the distant ancestry claims - with the disputed DNA test and her statements about her ancestors. The cat exists precisely for people who aren't citizens, and who have no proven ancestry, but believe they have ancestry "somewhere back there" (in addition to those who make what others believe are simply false claims). She fits the category. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I self reverted. If we're only talking about partial descent, afaik she does still say that. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:32, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

that's like saying I must be old because I have some gray hair. I was 18. 2600:1004:B14C:5298:34ED:EAA6:7AB7:4743 (talk) 03:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warren was a diversity hire, she is the only Harvard professors till that time whograduated from a public college. https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-09-21/from-oklahoma-to-harvard-elizabeth-warren-trod-a-tricky-pathUnselfstudier (talk) 20:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That article doesn't say anything about her being a diversity hire. If being the first Harvard professor from a public college is an acheivement, it's one the article implies she earned by drawing "notice, and then acclaim" teaching and doing research in other universities. OrangeCroutons (talk) 15:50, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the Dr. Phil story, while not currently cited this way, was cited in several articles and biographical profiles of Warren. I'll look. Andre🚐 05:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the area where the article lists children, it says "2, including Amelia". It is know that that Warren's children are Amelia Warren Tyagi and Alexander Warren. It would be useful to change the information to include Alexander Warren, as of current it is difficult to glean his existence from the current article. Thanks for reading, and have a great day! Emrehozchan (talk) 13:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Liu1126 (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

As a former chair of hiring and advancement at Harvard, I take exception with you ludicrous statement that Ms Warren received no preferential consideration due to her claims of indigenous heritage. You lose credibility when you cover for her. This site, which I have given substantial donations to,absolutely must show the good, bad, and ugly, otherwise you are nothing. 2601:249:8780:6530:4D57:406:3A73:8FBD (talk) 07:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: The article does not state that she received no preferential consideration. It does, however, attribute statements that she received no preferential consideration to other reliable sources. If you are able to provide other sources of equal quality stating the opposite, please do so that they can be included. Please also keep in mind that all Wikipedia editors are volunteers – while we appreciate your financial support of the site, none of us receive any compensation. Tollens (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This line claims that Elizabeth Warren was in the top ten most popular senators according to the poll, but the citation explicitly says that she was the 18th most popular senator in the poll. I suggest changing the text "10" to "20" > Warren was rated among the top 10 most popular senators in an April 2024 poll by Morning Consult. 65.24.241.138 (talk) 23:32, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the description of why she changed her name? 71.183.30.26 (talk) 12:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? She took her first husband's name when she married him. Acroterion (talk) 13:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the article discusses this in the first sentence of Elizabeth Warren#Personal life. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There is incorrect information in her bio. She ran against incumbent Scott Brown, not Tim Scott who is from a southern state. The bio incorrectly links to Tim Scott in a couple of places. ~2025-31855-18 (talk) 03:21, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The article does not state that Warren ran against Tim Scott, and correctly identifies Scott Brown as the incumbent whom she defeated in 2012 to become the first female U.S. senator from Massachusetts.

It identifies Tim Scott as Warren's predecessor as Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, and Warren's successor in the ceremonial Order of precedence of the United States. General Ization ^Talk 03:41, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]