Talk:Erika Kirk

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Dclemens1971 talk 16:35, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Kirk in 2025

• ... that Charlie Kirk's widow Erika Kirk (pictured) was Miss Arizona USA winner in 2012?

• Source: What to know about Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk's widow and Turning Point USA's new CEO (NPR)

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mary C. Henderson
  • Comment: The article is currently nominated for deletion, but it looks likely to be kept. It is fully protected at the moment so the bits that would otherwise make good hook alternatives cannot yet be added to the article.

Created by Tbhotch (talk) and Stanley Gordon (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 252 past nominations.

Surtsicna (talk) 08:20, 14 September 2025 (UTC).

• Article expanded by +5x since 10 September 2025 to DYK nom. Long enough and new enough. Well-sourced, neutral (content is reasonably basic / plain as has been under full protection since 11 September) and free from copyvio (including images). Passed a well participated AfD. The hook is interesting, non-controversial, and well supported. QPQ is done. Good to go. Aszx5000 (talk) 12:19, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
• Adding an unsolicited opinion: "... that Charlie Kirk's widow Erika Kirk (pictured) was the winner of Miss Arizona USA in 2012?" and "... that Charlie Kirk's widow Erika Kirk (pictured) was crowned Miss Arizona USA in 2012?" are more grammatically sound versions of the hook. Yue🌙 22:20, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
• @Surtsicna and @Aszx5000, can you explain how biographywallah.com is a reliable source? Per their about page this is a blog and a WP:SPS. TarnishedPath^talk 13:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Also Earwig shows 36.7% and I don't see that being explained by quotes or completely by proper nouns. TarnishedPath^talk 13:06, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath, do you doubt that she was Miss Arizona in 2012 (the internet is drowning in WP:RS/P that verify it), is your copy vio concern with the article of the DYK phrase? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:07, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

@Aszx5000, no I don't doubt that she was Miss Arizona in 2012. My concern is with the sourcing and close paraphrasing in the article. I have zero problem with the hook. Whether the hook was good or not, and I was looking at promoting it earlier, if this was to land on the front page with the article in its current state, this would end up at WP:ERRORS very fast. Please replace biographywallah.com with a better source and summarise to remove any close paraphrasing to it. TarnishedPath^talk 14:25, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath, I have replaced the source with a better one. The Earwig is 20.6% and most of it are attributed quotes or specific terms (e.g. "Everyday Heroes Like You"), so there will be no problem with copyvio (this is a very "plainly" written article). Aszx5000 (talk) 17:09, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Earwig still shows 36.7% to https://biographywallah.com/erika-kirk/ and even after discarding proper nouns there appears to be three sentences which are almost completely copied verbatim. I suggest those three sentences in the article need addressing prior to this being approved. TarnishedPath^talk 07:08, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath, I suspect that 'biographywallah' is just scraping from Wikipedia. There is no journalistic/writing input to 'biographywallah' and there is zero chance that WP editors used 'biographywallah' to create this WP article. I have had this with other DYKs such as with Template:Did you know nominations/Traverse (climbing) (2nd nomination) (different online blog). We could probably run many WP:Bios against 'biographywallah' (and other online blogs/data scrapers etc.) and find similar matches? Aszx5000 (talk) 09:39, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

@Aszx5000 It looks like you're correct. I previously didn't think that could be the case given our article was only expanded out from a redirect on 11 September, but I've just had a look at the meta data for biographywallah page which indicates that it was created 24 September. TarnishedPath^talk 09:54, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

@Surtsicna: You mentioned that the addition of alternative hooks was being obstructed by this being promoted. What were they? Also, I recommend running this on her birthday, 20 November.--Launchballer 00:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

The obstruction was due to the page protection. I suppose at this point I would nominate:

• ALT1: ... that Erika Kirk took the stage at her husband's memorial service amid fireworks?

@Launchballer: The second bold link assuming, of course, that the article survives its own deletion discussion. I have a QPQ ready for it in case it does. We could even get a shot of her and the fireworks from the video in the article. Surtsicna (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I did mean protection, that's the it-was-1am-my-time talking. I had single hooks in mind but let's see what the AfD says - for now, I suggest something like ALT2: ... that Erika Kirk (pictured) forgave her husband's killer at his memorial service?--Launchballer 16:45, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

@Surtsicna: AfD's been kept. What else do you have in mind?--Launchballer 16:33, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

@Launchballer: Here is the second QPQ. I do think the fireworks option is more attention-grabbing. Surtsicna (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

You're the boss. I'll review that article in the next 24 hours.--Launchballer 23:15, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Long enough, new enough, Earwig has no valid complaints. The QPQ is not technically a full review but if we're accepting quickfails as QPQs, this is well within the spirit of that. ALT1 checks out (Ctrl+F the source for 'pyrotechnics'). The article uses Fox News and Newsweek as two of three sources for the same claim; I'd yeet both, but this isn't a DYK issue. Let's roll.--Launchballer 17:38, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Recent Publicity

There have been many appearances from Erika recently on Fox, podcasts, etc. I'm aware of WP:NOTNEWS but some of her statements have been worth putting into Wikipedia in my opinion. Looking for opinions from more advanced editors on how best to do this. Thanks! ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 20:24, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

My best suggestion is to carefully review WP:BLP for guidance on this. Post suggested sentences with references here on the Talk Page. It helps to get consensus on the Talk Page before making changes in order for the changes to stick. Bill Heller (talk) 21:01, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Adding a section of "public life / appearance after husband Charlie Kirk's death" could be helpful and informative as this page continues to grow in years to come. A subsection of "public perception" might eventually be helpful as a reference to the disparity between conspiracy-laden views and direct information from Turning Point USA.

I do not think it would be useful to add the conspiracies themselves, but it would benefit readers to acknowledge the diaspora of current publicity regarding Erika Kirk. Philosophyresearch (talk) 19:28, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Missing information

why is her mother's heritage scrubbed from the early life section? She was syrian/lebanese and italian! And why is her first marriage not in her personal page? I expected more thorough edits from a community based encyclopedia, not this cherry picking of information... ~2025-40697-26 (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Would you like to add this information? That would be benficial. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 23:40, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Firstly, to the OP: I recommend that any contributions you make, especially in contentious topics, BLPs or EP articles (like this one) be made with an account. A Wikipedia account is simple to set up and creates a trail where other editors can help you along as you start your Wikipedia contribution journey.

To your suggestion: I would recommend that you include a specific sentence or series of sentences that broadly adhere to WP:LOP so that we can discuss them and insert them if they fit into the tone of the article. Pay particular attention to WP:BLP. Happy editing! Bill Heller (talk) 20:59, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

There is an 2014 interview of Erika Kirk (then Erika Frantzve) with then-boyfriend Cabot Phillips sharing that she has lived in China and Puerto Rico. In an audition submission for The Amazing Race (full video begins here at 1:12) and at 5:35 the pair begins describing their travel experiences independent of one another. At 6:21 Frantzve says, "I've lived in China–I lived in Chongqing, I've been to Romania, I've been to Croatia, um, lived in Puerto Rico for a little bit, so..."

It is unknown when and why the Erika Kirk resided in Chongqing or Puerto Rico. Philosophyresearch (talk) 19:18, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Edit request: add sourced ancestry/heritage to Early life

I would like to add a brief, neutrally worded sentence about Erika Kirk’s Syrian/Lebanese heritage to the “Early life” section.

However, the currently cited biographical sources in the article (e.g., People and The Independent) do not appear to mention Syrian/Lebanese ancestry. Please only add this if a high-quality reliable source explicitly states it (per WP:BLP/WP:V/WP:RS), such as a major newspaper/magazine profile or a reputable interview where she self-identifies.

Proposed text (to be inserted in Early life, after the sentence about her parents):

Kirk is of [Syrian and/or Lebanese] descent through her mother.

Source to use:

[Please insert the reliable source here; avoid IMDb, EthniCelebs, social media, genealogy sites, etc.] ChromeArm (talk) 14:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

ChromeArm (talk) 14:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Not done – please clarify. Please provide a reliable source for the requested edit. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 16:35, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Relating to but distinct from "ancestry/heritage", it would be informative to include Erika Kirk's extended international travels in the section of Early Life.

I suggest the following:

There is an 2014 interview of Erika Kirk (then Erika Frantzve) with then-boyfriend Cabot Phillips sharing that she has lived in China and Puerto Rico. In an audition submission for The Amazing Race (full video begins here at 1:12) and at 5:35 the pair begins describing their travel experiences independent of one another. At 6:21 Frantzve says, "I've lived in China–I lived in Chongqing, I've been to Romania, I've been to Croatia, um, lived in Puerto Rico for a little bit, so..." Philosophyresearch (talk) 19:22, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

I did a brief Google search and I don't see initially any reliable sources that would support this claim. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 23:57, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Her full birthplace needs to be updated and the existence of her maternal half-sister needs to be acknowledged, as well as the full/real names of her parents.

She was born at Good Samaritan Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio, and she has an older maternal half-sister by the name of Tonya Lynn Siegrist (née Stanley). The real names of her parents need to be updated, as well; census records show her father's name is in fact, Kenneth Randall Frantzve, not Kent, and he merely went by "Kent" for short; and her mother's whole name is Lori Ann Abbas (and allegedly, her full name is Loretta); she's no longer a Frantzve, as they've been divorced since 1999 and in fact she's remarried to a man named Lawrence (Larry) Guinta, Jr. This information is all readily available through newspaper findings, census records, etc. with a Google search. Don't know why none of it's acknowledged in her Wiki article. Catastrophicise (talk) 11:53, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

URLs ?

Piñanana (talk) 19:02, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Her grandfather, Carl Henrik Frantzvé 1922-2016 was Swedish

also: https://www.ancestry.com/search/?name=_Frantzve

also: https://sv.geneastar.org/slaktforskning/frantzveeri/erika-kirk

Piñanana (talk) 20:32, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

https://web.archive.org/web/20201109025946/https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/us/politics/28cheney.html

Liz Cheney’s appeal in conservative settings like the one in Nashville was evident within seconds of her arrival. She strolled in without entourage to a Sheraton ballroom, unrecognized at first, past a cluster of women getting their pictures taken with Joe the Plumber. “God bless you, I pray for your abundance,” a woman from Scottsdale, Ariz., Lori Frantzve, said upon realizing who Ms. Cheney was. “Oh, I have five kids; I have plenty of abundance,” Ms. Cheney replied.

Piñanana (talk) 21:00, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Erika Kirk?: Fox News about Wikipedia.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2025-10-02/In the media

https://web.archive.org/web/20260101195609/https://www.foxnews.com/us/wikipedia-debates-deleting-profile-page-charlie-kirks-wife-erika

https://web.archive.org/web/20251107233542/https://www.the-express.com/news/us-news/183774/erika-kirks-wikipedia-page-faces-deletion

https://web.archive.org/web/20251014201446/https://thetab.com/2025/09/15/wikipedia-is-planning-to-take-down-erika-kirks-page-and-the-reason-why-is-shockingly-brutal

Piñanana (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Looks like the nabobs have been fed. — An anonymous username, not my real name 18:30, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Erika Kirk: Controversy

I think this page should have a controversy section, as Erika Kirk has been subject to numerous claims of profiting off of right-wing media after her husband's assassination in 2025. Yehoshua667 (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

For example this? Conservative Influencer Erika Kirk Faces Grooming Allegations After Alleged Messages to Teen Surfaces --Slashme (talk) 12:44, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

So what? Grooming teenagers is probably not as profitable as her political activities. Dimadick (talk) 13:15, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, also that. She has been accused of grooming minors and grifting from right-wing media as well. Yehoshua667 (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

United States Air Force Academy Board of Visitors

Should we add that she is a Member of the United States Air Force Academy Board of Visitors to her Infobox? Atomus23 (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. ChaosAkita (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Use last name alone

The standard in biographies is most short references are the last name alone. Also we only use the last name of the subject alone to refer to the subject, not to any other person with the same last name in the article. I think we should follow that guideline most of here. The one exception is references where both Charlie Kirk and Erika Kirk are being refereed to, we can in some cases use first names. Elsewhere in the article we should in short refereces call the subject Kirk. Any references to her actions before her marriage should use here maiden last name though.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:38, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I see this hasn’t happened yet, but I agree. Seasider53 (talk) 22:09, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

How to readd some removed lead content into the body

I will be removing the lead section sentence: "Kirk's assumption as the role of CEO of Turning Point USA has come under fire from pundits, both liberal and conservative, and especially from Candace Owens." This was dropped into the lead without any phrasing in the body per WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY, also examining the sources, neither the cited Y!Entertainment article or The Hollywood Reporter article make any claims that Erika is under fire from anybody, I will say I think this was a good faith edit, and it was most likely confused with the sentiment in the THR article stating that Candace Owens had come under scrutiny. (Since the Y!Entertainment article really focuses on Candaces comments on her pageantry background)

THR - "The backlash from within conservative media has been unusually sharp. Ben Shapiro, Daily Wire co-founder and one of the right’s most prominent voices, did not mince words. “As a person who doesn’t often use the adjective ‘satanic,’” Shapiro told his audience, “what Candace is doing right now is absolutely satanic to Erika Kirk.” - "Others in conservative media, including Dan Bongino and Dave Rubin, followed Shapiro with similar language in condemning Owens for Bride of Charlie."

We should definitely move this information into the body but rephrase it accurately to show what reliable sources are documenting about Candace's waged war and accusations leveled against Erika Kirk. Then if there is enough weight in the body we can figure out a way to portray that info into the lead. Eruditess (talk) 20:41, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree that this does not belong in the lead. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 23:07, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Public image section

For someone so popular her article is very short. Can I suggest a Public image section to add more to this article. Inayity (talk) 16:55, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

This could be a great section. It will most likely draw some controversy but worth a shot. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 19:46, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

"Public Image" sections (or similar variants) are a common theme on most biography pages, so I think it was a great addition here. I would say "Public Image" sections are tricky to balance since BLP protections are taken very seriously (as they should be) and public image is usually based off of subjective views. I started a talk page conversation over on Charlie Kirk's article that deals with a problem I now see over here on Erika's page since the "Public Image" section has been introduced. That problem being WP:CRUFT material that does not pass the ten year test. Over on Charlie Kirk's article we see it being spammed with WP:EXHAUSTIVE amount of trivial/cruft content. To prevent this from occuring here on this aritcle, I am removing the "Druski" skit section as it is a simple case of media sensationalism/WP:RECENTISM. We don't want to set precedence to add every single joke made about a living person onto their Wikipedia article.

Also I am removing the sentence about Candace Owens being a "frequent critic" of Erika Kirk due to WP:BLPBALANCE which states:

"Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone."

The key word in that policy is "responsibly". Owens' frequent critique would be unresponsible to include (not to mention breaching BLP protections) by giving WP:UNDUEWEIGHT to unsubstantiated subjective conspiracy theory claims. There is extensive inclusion of these "critiques" over on Owens' own article. Even then I feel like after reviewing it on Owens' article there might be BLP claims to exercise over there as well. MaximusEditor (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

After revisiting the section after it was trimmed down, I actually just removed it for now until we can find better sourcing. The whole section was reading like a gossip blog. One paragraph was sourced from gossip blog websites Wonderwall.com & RadarOnline.com. Also the NYT article quote was an informal WP:RSOPINION piece, and I thought we can't really have a "Public Opinion" section with one quote from a opinion piece article so I removed it. Lets get more factual information and better sourcing and revisit a "Public Image" section. Eruditess (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I can understand removing the section on Owens, but I firmly believe the Druski removal is unwarranted. The president of the United States, Kirk herself, and many journalists covered the skit extensively. While I understand the aforementioned argument of not adding every little joke about Kirk to the article, this is something that seems to be of some degree of importance and an amalgamation of her public image as of late. I strongly suggest keeping it. --BakedintheHole (talk) 23:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Agreed and her mention of it warrants mention of it here, in my opinion. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 18:33, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Initially I would say my train of thought was the exact same as Guacpocalypse's logic. However, after looking at the removed sources I actually find myself agreeing with keeping the Druski skit off of Kirk's article. For one, all the sourcing never definitively states any actual facts. Druski's skit never states he is parodying Kirk herself (The skit is titled "How Conservative Women in America act."). Parodying Kirk is something that all the sources imply but never state as fact, The Yahoo!Entertainment source should have been removed as it was violating WP:HEADLINE, (the body of the article doesn't discuss Kirk in relation to the Druski skit, only that Grok AI mistook Druski for Kirk). The Complex article source says "Erika Kirk may be addressing Druski’s controversial skit that seemingly parodied her"; “I have comedians dressing up in whiteface,” Kirk said, appearing to reference Druski". The Independent source says "The two-minute clip has garnered over 184 million views on X, with many commenters claiming that Druski was specifically lampooning Erika Kirk" ("X" Commenters alleging something doesn't warrant inclusion). As for Trumps remarks, exact same issue. The sources don't state any actual definitive facts on who Trump was urging Kirk to sue. The Independent source: "President Donald Trump appeared to urge Erika Kirk to sue a comedian whose video mocking MAGA women went viral across social media. The Forbes source :"Trump didn’t name anyone, but said he has told Kirk she should sue some of “these [people]...they’re so jealous of Erika.” After seeing that the sourcing was so weak it couldn't actually state any concrete facts, we should definitely not add this to Kirk's article. I do think the removed information could be included on Druski's article, maybe including the Grok mix up. If editors find every time an AI makes an accidental mix up notable for inclusion, which opens up dangerous precedence in itself. Eruditess (talk) 03:16, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

All excellent points and worth making the case to leave it off. A lot of it is nuanced so I'd agree with you here. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 20:00, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 June 2026

Change

| image = AmericaFest 2025 - Erika Kirk 23 (cropped).jpg (in the infobox)

to

| image = Erika Kirk, 2025 (3x4 cropped).jpg (Better photo) Nutella lover • [ chat│supervise ] 22:22, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done Looks like a better photo to me. Anyone who disagrees is free to revert and we can discuss it. Day Creature (talk) 01:06, 10 June 2026 (UTC)