Talk:Barack Obama Sr.

Recreated version

Please note that this page had been in the past been redirected per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barack Hussein Obama Sr. A new good-faith draft was created at Barack Obama Sr. and has now been moved here as history merge per a request at WP:RM, but also so that its merits as standalone article can be discussed. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

intro

I am not convinced that this should be a separate article, but if it is we need to be clear that his notability is strictly as Barack Obama's father. The lede has been reworked to reflect that - his position as an economist for the Kenyan government would not yield an article, so it is not the lead sentence. Also I included "absent" because he did not raise his son, and was not present for his growing up - they saw each other only once after he left the family. Tvoz |talk 05:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The word "absent" seems out of place to me in the lede. It seems too soon in the article to get into the amount of time he spent with his son (which wasn't much, but wasn't nothing either). --Allen (talk) 21:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It was pretty close to nothing; there was no ongoing relationship at all after he left when son was 2 yrs old. That's absent, and why I think his notabilty for a separate article is questionable. Tvoz |talk 05:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

"biological father" might be better than "absent father". This precisely defines the relationship by distinguishing the fellow from Obama's stepfather; in American English to have an "absent father" implies that the child does not have a father in the house (which Obama did ... a stepfather) and also has an inappropriately judgmental ring to it. rewinn (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe Obama himself refers to his biological father as being "absent" - it's not my word, nor am I am being judgmental about it. The problem with "biological" alone is it doesn't speak to the salient point of whether or not he was a part of his son's life, which I think should be in the lede. (Also, note that Barack only had a stepfather "in the house" for the few years he lived in Indonesia - for the majority of his growing up there was no father, biological or step, in his house or in his life.) I have no problem with using "biological", but I'd like to also get in that lede sentence the fact that Obama Sr. was not a part of the son's life after age 2. The details of Obama Sr's life beyond Barack from age 0-2 should be seen in that context - which I think "absent" expresses. So I'd be fine with "absent biological father" or anything else that gets at what I'm talking about. Tvoz |talk 16:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Bioglogical father is correct. The fact that biological had to be added implies that he was absent. In the for what it's worth department he did have a male in the household from age 10 on when his white maternal grandparents Stanley Dunham and [Madelyn Dunham]] raised him in Hawaii while his mother was off globe trotting. Americasroof (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say there was no male in the house, I responded to your the incorrect statement that his stepfather was the "father" in the house, that's all. And adding "biological" implies that there was another father, which was only true for a short time. Tvoz |talk 23:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

"Biological father" doesn't seem right to me either. I usually hear that term used in the context of adoption, when the person referred to as "father" is different from the "biological father." I think the lede should refer to Obama Sr. simply as the senator's "father," which is what his son usually calls him. --Allen (talk) 22:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Which is why I said "absent" in the first place. Tvoz |talk 23:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's separate the two words. Tvoz, I can't tell whether you agree with me that "biological" should go... what do you think? As for "absent," I am okay with the new sentence you inserted... I wouldn't have put it in the lede myself, but it is factual and neutral and gets the point across. Can we therefore remove the word "absent?" I think it is too subjective and I agree with Rewinn that it has a judgmental ring to it. --Allen (talk) 03:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm o.k. the way it's written. Here's another example Leslie Lynch King, Sr, the father of Gerald Ford. I am curious if the father even paid a dime of child support.Americasroof (talk) 07:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[out] Allen - I can go either way. If you and others feel strongly about it, it's ok with me to remove either or both "absent" and "biological", but only if the sentence (or a similar one) remains in the lede about his not being there to raise Barack. I think this is important to be included in the lede as his paternity is the only reason the article exists at all, but his notability is questionable to me seeing as how little he actually had to do with Barack. Hope this clarifies - it's late, so I can't tell if it's coherent enough. Tvoz |talk 07:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Tvoz. I'm removing "absent" and "biological" and leaving your new sentence. Americasroof, you said you were okay with the way it is now but you didn't say if you'd be okay with the change I'm making. Let us know if you're not. I think the Gerald Ford case is different, because our article suggests he was informally adopted by Gerald Ford, Sr... meaning "biological father" is useful for distinguishing King from Ford's adoptive (sort of) father. --Allen (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The lead still establishes that he was not in the picture for that long so I'm o.k. with it. Americasroof (talk) 15:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability

While this fellow is not the most notable person in the world, he *is* the main subject of a bestselling book by a leading political figure. Whether reasonable or not, the interest in him seems far to exceed that in the parents of other celebrities, e.g. Bill Clinton's father. Thus I would suggest he is sufficiently notable for his own article. rewinn (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Even if Obama Jr. is never elected President, his father is notable on two accounts (1) he's the subject of the # 1 bestseller on college campus bookstores (according to the Chronicle of Higher Education) and (2) he was the senior economist of a national government (Kenya). Bearian (talk) 18:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

There are many books written by notable people about people who aren't very notable. And although Barack is notable, nobody talks about the book that mentions his father. His best known work is his other book "The Audacity of Hope". Simply being talked about in a book or being mentioned by the media is something many people have gone through, many of which aren't considered notable enough to be given an article. He should be mentioned in the artcles Barack Obama and other minor articles relaed to him, but not given his own. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 02:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I actually think that there's no real need to have this separate article, but it is simply not true that "no one talks about the book that mentions his father" - it more than mentions his father, it is about his father and what he thinks about his father and his childhood, and it is talked about a great deal. Tvoz/talk 03:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that, I think the title and article imply that he's a major part of this book, and I wasn't trying to make light of that. What I'm saying is that this guy is already talked about in other articles where it's right for him to be included, but that there is no need for him to have his own article. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 05:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Nyangoma-Kogelo

This article claims that Nyangoma-Kogelo is in Siaya District, while Barack Obama claims that is in Bondo District. Which one is it? Bash Kash (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you believe both are correct? At the time of Senior's birth Kyongoma-Kogelo was in Siaya District, but since then it has changed to Bondo District. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 03:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, I figured that. :-) Which one should we use on Wikipedia? (for consistency) Bash Kash (talk) 05:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

We can do both, using "(now in....)" rewinn (talk) 15:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

delete article

I propose this article be deleted. He is not notable. ObamaGirlMachine (talk) 01:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Support deleting. Not notable and there is no reason to think the person this article is about will be notable in the future WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Being mentioned a few times by the media doesn't make you notable. I'm using this same argument for all biography articles being nominated for deletion that are related to Barack Obama, it's clear that Michelle Obama is the only notable person given an article, the others all seem to be fluff. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 01:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Note - ObamaGirlmachine (above) is a problematic and potentially disruptive new WP:SPA account that has been canvassing others to come to this and other pages in an attempt to delete articles for Obama family members. Suggest speedy closure if these articles are nominated. - Wikidemo (talk) 17:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Bigamy?

I don't understand the bit about Kezia. He married her BEFORE Ann Dunham, had 2 kids, then went back to her for 2 more AFTER Ann Dunham (and possibly after his "third" wife)? And "he never divorced [her]"????

Doesn't this render the marriage to Ann Dunham invalid ipso facto? I don't believe you can take a second wife anywhere under US law.

This may slip by the authorities in some remote communities without paperwork or IDs (FLDS comes to mind), but as a foreign national with passports, student visas, etc etc, I'm sure his preexisting "marriage" must have been recorded in all sorts of places! How did he ever slip past the authorities in Maui?

Religion

Since the religion field in the infobox was filled out yesterday with "Islam",[1] "Atheism" has been added,[2] taken off,[3] re-added,[4] and now "Islam" has been taken off.[5] Does anyone know what he was at the time of his death? I know he was raised in Islam, but was apparently an Atheist by the time Barack was born, but not sure if he shifted back to Islam when he returned to Kenya. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 22:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Muslim

Why is there no mention of Barack Obama, Sr being a muslim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.223.51.70 (talk) 21:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Probably because he was an atheist for at least a portion of his life (and it does mention his Islamic heritage).--67.176.175.133 (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Not only is The fact that him being Muslim not mentioned, But the evidence to prove that he was an Atheist was quoted by his Daughter Auma. In which there is no mention of her through out the whole page. Worth taking a look at. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.129.214 (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Article location

Should this be moved to "Barack Obama I" since his son is "Barack Obama II" and not "Barack Obama, Jr."?--67.176.175.133 (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

No - he was not known as such and that will only confuse readers. Tvoz/talk 15:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal/old: March-April 2008

I do not think this article should be merged. Michelle Obama and Barack Obama Senior have their own wikipedia pages, even though they are solely famous by relationship to Senator Obama. I think his grandmother deserves her own page too, especially since she's being quoted more and more often in the media.

I would ask that the notability and merge tags be removed. GreekParadise (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Considering that George W. Bush's great-great grandfather has an article of his own, I believe that Barack Obama's step-grandmother, who is still alive and giving interviews to the press, is notable enough to warrant an article. --Tocino 05:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If there's a problem, we could merge and redirect these lesser articles into a "Relatives of Barack Obama" article, and put a summary in the main Obama page with a link to the full article. That would be the most efficient, in my view. --Scharb 17:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scharb (talk • contribs)

I think that Sarah Obama plays a special role in Obama's life that the other Kenyan relatives do not play. There's a reason the media always goes to her for first comment. How about this compromise? We rename the "Sarah Obama" page to be "Sarah Obama and Barack Obama's relatives in Kenya." I think people are more likely to search for "Sarah Obama" than "Kenyan relatives of Barack Obama."GreekParadise (talk) 21:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

No, that's way too clumsy for a title (see WP:NAME). I'd agree with Scharb's suggestion, but unless editors of the other tiny sub articles for other relatives agree, there's no point in changing this one.Tvoz |talk 18:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal
What exactly is the July 2008 merge proposal? What are the reasons? Tvoz/talk 01:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Note that a new discussion re keeping Sarah's bio separate/merging it somewhere/deleting it has emerged over here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Obama.  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 16:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC) Update: it's now here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Obama.  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 21:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama, Sr. or Barack Obama I

As the birth certificate of Barack Obama makes it evident that he is Barack Hussein Obama II, and not Barack Obama, Junior does this article fall under Barack Obama I or the significantly more common and used Barack Obama, Senior? –– Lid^(Talk) 13:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll be honest with you. I have absolutely no idea which is correct. As an Englishman, the whole "Junior/Senior" thing is something I am wholly unfamiliar with. In Britain, it is uncommon to be named for one's father, so the issue rarely arises. It is possible that the international nature of the Obama family means that the way they refer to themselves may be a mix of different standards. I have not read any of Obama's books, but these may provide guidance on this issue. -- Scjessey (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

It does not come up because he doesn't refer to himself as "Junior" nor to his father as "Senior". simply referring to his father as "father" or as Barack. –– Lid^(Talk) 12:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Noroton (over on Talk:Barack Obama) is right about article name. "Sr." should definitely be in this article name. What we want as an article name is whatever people are most likely to search for (and what is most widely used in sources). However, the version of name that appears in the first sentence of an article (usually the first words) is supposed to be "full official name"; I think that argues against including the "Sr." in the lead, it's a popular designation but certainly not one he was born with, and probably not one he ever used in legal documents or the like. LotLE×talk 16:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Lulu. (Note that if ledes at "Barack Obama" and "Barack Obama, Sr." were to read Barack Hussein Obama II and Barack Hussein Obama, respecively, roman numerals for "the 2nd" and sans roman numerals would supply the necessary distinction lede-to-lede – while the article titles would remain distinct through retaining Sr. for Sen. Obama's father.)  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 19:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for agreeing. On a complete side point: what's the thing with misspelling "lead". I've seen other people do it do, occasionally, enough that I'm pretty sure it's deliberate not a typo (but it's a weird joke/pun if so). LotLE×talk 19:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

This usually doesn't work quite as well as it does in this instance, though. Eg "Theodore Roosevelt (September 22, 1831 – February 9, 1878) was the father of U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt, Jr...." maybe is less compelling? (As for the antique orthogrphy of lede: before linotype let alone IBM, type was made of lead and setters would generically refer to "lead" /lɛd/ to mean spacers they'd insert to space lines of text from each other, position lines of text between margins, as typespaces and the like: "Add lead," "Change lead," "Less lead," etc., they might write in the margin of a proof to an assitant. So when they wanted to distinguish between that and a fancy heteronym meaning "textual introduction," they came up with the practice of substituting an olde spelling of the same word to render it "Change lede," etc. – pronounced /liːd/. Cf. News style#Lede or lead.

(Yet – be that as it may – where does the practice of writing hed for "head"[line]; dek for "deck" [Oxford English Dictionary: "Part of a newspaper, periodical, etc., headline containing more than one line of type, esp. the part printed beneath the main headline"]; "graf" for "paragraph," as in nut graf for an intoductory summarizing paragraph; or Tk for "unwritten text to come" come from then?)  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 20:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's newsroom argot. Journalists spend their lives turning everybody else's specialized language into prose that a typical nonspecialist can understand and then among themselves (and now it leaks out at places like Wikipedia) writing argot. And therefore confusing people. I think some Wikipedia style pages have picked up this nonsense. I just looked it up: You can see here how we first talk about journalists not using argot -- in a paragraph introducing journalist argot. Note "jargon" in the first sentence and "jargon" describing the first item. Hypocrites! Noroton (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible bias in certain source

Perhaps it's just me, but the current source #5 <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=431908&in_page_id=1770> referenced in talking about Obama Sr.'s conversion to Islam does not read like a reliable and neutral source - it seems much like a tabloid smear, and the Daily Mail is currently published as a tabloid. I would recommend this article be checked for neutrality. 76.247.14.237 (talk) 01:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the article doesn't seem to be a reliable source. For example, it refers to his uncle Said Obama as as "cousin", even though the following sentence includes a quote where he says that Barack Obama Sr. was his "father's older brother". I recommend that it not be used a source, as it provides an "investigation" on Obama's father, yet it does not provide a single source to back-up its claims. Of course, I'm curious if anyone disagrees. What do people think? Khoikhoi 23:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to be bold and remove the source. There are two things now in the article that are probably true but need to be properly sourced:

• Before working as a cook for missionaries in Nairobi, Onyango had travelled widely, enlisting with the name Onyango Obama in the British colonial forces during World War I and visiting Europe, India, and Zanzibar, where he converted from Christianity to Islam and added Hussein to his name. The bit about him adding Hussein to his name after he converted to Islam isn't in the cited article (unless I'm missing something), so it needs to have a better ref.
• She did not know that he already had a wife in Kenya. I believe this is mentioned in Dreams from My Father, but this needs to be verified as well. The previous source was deleted for the above reasons.

Khoikhoi 06:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "STFamilyTree" :
  • {{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4406813.ece | title=Barack Obama’s brother pushes Chinese imports on US | work=Times Online| accessdate=2008-07-27}}
  • {{cite web|url=http://www.suntimes.com/images/cds/MP3/obamatree.pdf | title=Chicago Sun Times Barack Family Tree | work=Chicago Sun Times | accessdate=2008-03-23}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 15:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)