Talk:List of presidents of the United States

See also

I'd like to suggest adding a link to Historical rankings of presidents of the United States to the See also section. Thanks. -93.237.4.154 (talk) 11:47, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Before writing the above I had used Ctrl-F (Firefox, PC) to search for the term "ranking". Got nothing, only Phrase not found. I now noticed that a link actually does exist at the very end under Lists related to the presidents and vice presidents of the United States, but you have to click [show] before seeing it (obviously) or before Ctrl-F acknowledges it's there. I think that's really hard to find. Of course not all lists in that foldout (is that the term?) can be added to See also, but maybe a few? Historical rankings of presidents of the United States is arguably more relevant than List of presidents of the United States with facial hair, which is deservedly hidden in the same foldout. Sorry if I'm causing a mess. -93.237.4.154 (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Lead image proposal

This was brought forward a few weeks ago & I'd like to rekindle it. I've changed my views on having a lead image in this article & at the List of vice presidents of the United States article. Indeed we should have a lead image. On the basis of keeping consistency between the two articles? I would (for example) suggest the White House for here & Number One Observatory Circle for the veep's list. GoodDay (talk) 18:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support both. - wolf 18:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support both. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support both. – Drdpw (talk) 01:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

'Tis done, for both. GoodDay (talk) 21:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

And reverted, at least provisionally, as having a captionless off-center ill-explained photo as the lead of the article is not going to get it over the FL hurdle. --Golbez (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Do whatever you want. I'm sorry I even rekindled the topic. GoodDay (talk) 22:04, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

welcome aboard the apathy train --Golbez (talk) 23:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I have added a captioned lead image to both articles. Drdpw (talk) 22:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

How about, a front view (north side) of the White House. GoodDay (talk) 22:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

The current image (added by Drdpw) looks good. Cheers - wolf 23:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Gerald Ford

Ford was never elected President or Vice President, but he is still given an election year of 1972. This should probably be addressed. I suggest either making the election year blank with a note explaining the situation, or adding a note saying he was only elected to the House of Representatives that year. 209.129.115.57 (talk) 06:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

He completed the 1973–77 presidential term, which was created by the 1972 election. GoodDay (talk) 06:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Exactly; and I have de-linked all elections when repeated due to an intra-term succession, as they were not separate / new elections. As for "1972" in the Ford row, I do not see a need to add a note, as his path to the presidency is well noted already. Drdpw (talk) 14:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I find the whole 'new' setup, is messed up. It was alright the way it was weeks ago, with Harrison & Tyler under 1840 election, Taylor & Fillmore under 1848 election, Nixon & Ford under 1972 election, etc. What we've got now? suggests a special presidential election occurred, after each presidential deaths & resignation. GoodDay (talk) 20:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the way it is now doesn't work. But I disagree that Ford should be under 1972, etc. --Golbez (talk) 21:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Why do you disagree with having Nixon & Ford together, under the 1972 bit? Ford completed the very term that Nixon was re-elected to. GoodDay (talk) 21:57, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Because this is a list of presidents, not terms. Ford was not elected in 1972. As usual I suggest using the system in use at List of governors of Alabama etc. --Golbez (talk) 22:05, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Tyler wasn't elected president in 1840, Fillmore in 1848, A. Johnson in 1864, Arthur in 1880, T. Roosevelt in 1900, Coolidge in 1920, Truman in 1944 & L. Johnson in 1960. Why single out Ford? This is the presidential list, not the vice presidential list. GoodDay (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

"Why single out Ford?" I didn't. His was simply the easiest option to discuss. You may have not noticed the ", etc.". --Golbez (talk) 22:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

At sometime in late July, somebody changed around the 'election column's info & (IMHO) made a mess of it. Thank goodness, the confusing changes weren't made to the List of vice presidents of the United States page. GoodDay (talk) 22:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I find it equally odd to find, for example: 1960 in President LBJ's row, as I do seeing 1972 in GRF's row. They were not elected POTUS in those years. Some variation of the example noted above might work here. Drdpw (talk) 22:31, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

TBH, deleting the 'election column' from this & the veep lists' page?, would be best. Adopting the governors list idea, would still make it appear that there's two separate terms between elections. GoodDay (talk) 22:36, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

"two separate terms between elections" what? and sure you could delete the column but it seems useful to have a link to their elections. --Golbez (talk) 22:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, there should be only 'one' term between elections, whether or not that includes more then one president. GoodDay (talk) 22:51, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree, but the column should be "elections," not terms. In other words, it should be a column that explains how the person entered office, either via an election or ascension. --Golbez (talk) 02:42, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Better idea. Delete the 'election column' from this page & the list of veeps page. GoodDay (talk) 02:45, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I think I said this before when it came up, and agree with those others here this time that the Ford entry would benefit from a simple note indicating how he became both vpotus and potus. It's somewhat unique and worthy of a note. I don't see how anyone can reasonably be so dead-set against this idea. - wolf 04:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

There is already a note next to Ford in his VP cell stating: Appointed as vice president under terms of Twenty-fifth Amendment, Section 2. The issue identified by the OP is that Ford was never elected President or Vice President, but he is still given an election year of 1972. That led to the observation that having, for example: 1840 in President Tyler's row and 1920 in President Coolidge's row is also inaccurate. The layout of the column is problematic. It looks odd to have an election year listed (a second time) in the row of a person not elected POTUS in that election. The question seems to now be, what to do about the nine times an election year is repeated in the row of a president-by-succession? Drdpw (talk) 05:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

We should change it back to its status 'before' late July 2022 or delete the election column 'here' & at the list of veeps page. GoodDay (talk) 05:37, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Instead of a note next to Ford's name in Nixon's VP slot, perhaps the note should be next be next to Ford's name in his own potus slot, regarding his appointments to both vpotus and potus, instead of being elected, and the uniqueness of that. - wolf 22:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

The VP note belongs where it is, as Ford (like Rockefeller) was appointed to the vice presidency. Also, Ford succeeded to the presidency, just like Tyler, both Johnsons, and the others, he was not appointed.

Ah, but Ford isn't "just like" those other men, is he? He is unique among all presidents, and I believe that is why people are seeking to have a simple note added beside his name indicating as such. The question is, why oppose this so strongly? It's just a note. A very common tool on WP. - wolf 01:43, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

He succeeded from the vice presidency to the presidency, just like Tyler, Fillmore, A. Johnson, Arthur, T. Roosevelt, Coolidge, Truman & L. Johnson. As for his being appointed veep, where's the others were elected veep? That's handled appropriately at Veeps list page. GoodDay (talk) 01:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't quite take your point. - wolf 01:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

In this article, it doesn't matter that Ford was an appointed vice president, who succeeded to the presidency. Besides, we already have a note in Nixon's entry, showing that Ford was appointed his vice president, following Agnew's resignation. GoodDay (talk) 01:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

(arbitrary break)

Yes, I'm aware of that. My point was since there is already a note, among many notes, why not just move and expand the Nixon VP one, or add a new one next to Ford as potus, that explains the unique circumstances of his ascendency to both of these offices, neither as the result of an election. He is the only person to have done this, I thought it would make an worthwhile note, it seems I'm not alone in this. So the only question that still remains unanswered is why this is so vehemently opposed? Thanks - wolf 02:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I can't speak for others. I oppose the proposed additional note, because Ford succeeded to the presidency from the vice presidency, just like eight others before him. The only notable difference concerning this page, is that his predecessor (Nixon) 'resigned' from office, rather then 'died' in office. GoodDay (talk) 03:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

And of those "eight others", which ones were appointed to the vice presidency as opposed to being elected? Which of any of the 46 presidents to date have assumed both the office of vice president and president without being elected in either case? That is unique and notable enough to merit an simple note, just like the many other this article has. This is the reason we have notes. Lastly, you still have clarified just why you're so vehemently against this? There is a obvious benefit here... what is the harm? - wolf 04:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

When was the last time all the living presidents were together?

Was it HW Bush's funeral or Biden's inauguration? Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 00:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Nixon's funeral? Not sure. GoodDay (talk) 00:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

It appears that Trump has no interest in hanging with the rest of the living former presidents, but then, they don't seem to broken up about it. (related news article) - wolf 04:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Obama picture

Why have the 2009 version of the Obama photo, it looks poorly and doesn't match his wikipedia page lead photo. All the other president's photo's on this page match their wikipedia ones. His 2nd one is way better. XDPOGCHAMPEPEGA (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2022 (UTC)