Talk:Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children

Confirmation nonsense

I see no reason why to add a speculative tone which clearly implies that the reader should doubt or be suspicious of a portion of Obama's biography. The sentence in question reads However, a hospital spokesperson has declined to confirm or deny that Obama was born there, citing federal privacy laws. The phrasing, and use of "however" just doesn't work. What is basically being said is "Federal law prohibits medical records from being released, even when it comes to hospitals confirming births. A hospital spokesperson followed the law." On top of that, the cited source has the spokesperson going on to suggest all the information out there says he was born at Kapiolani Hospital. I see no reason what so ever to include this sentence, except for well poisoning (which isn't a valid reason for inclusion). Would Ferrylodge rather prefer to cite a reliable source that actually disputes Obama's birth story, or can we just remove the POV attack outright?-Andrew c ^[talk] 00:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined to delete it, as it is a bit of WP:FRINGE nonsense. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp e.g. answers the question of the city of his birth pretty definitively. I'm not sure why the hospital isn't named on the birth certificate; maybe that's the practice in Hawaii. My own NY birth certificate lacks the hospital. Шизомби (talk) 00:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

(undent)Just for the record, here's the material that has been deleted:

"However, a hospital spokesperson has declined to confirm or deny that Obama was born there, citing federal privacy laws. See Hoover, Will. “Obama's Hawaii boyhood homes drawing gawkers”, Honolulu Advertiser (2008-11-09)."

Seems like a non-fringe source to me. Anyway, it's no big deal if you folks want it removed. I merely noticed this matter in the largest and most reputable newspaper in Hawaii, and therefore thought it would be interesting to note it here. I don't think that the newspaper is making any kind of fringe attack on Obama, but your mileage may vary. It seems worthwhile to mention here in our article that the hospital itself has not been saying Obama was born there, and to explain why. If I had wanted to violate NPOV, I would have said that the hospital declined to confirm, without mentioning that they also declined to deny.Ferrylodge (talk) 01:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The source isn't fringe. The quote as used was fringe, addressing the lunacy about Obama supposedly being foreign-born. Incidentally, I wonder how many other presidents whose hospitals of birth are identified on Wikipedia. I'd guess not many. Anyway, there's a difference between what that newspaper might consider newsworthy and what this encyclopedia may consider encyclopedic. What was written in this article reflected a doubt about and/or a desire to sow doubt about his birthplace. That's not encyclopedic. The same claim that a hospital will neither confirm nor deny a birth there could be made about everyone in the United States who has an article on Wikipedia, and I don't see that happening. It's NPOV and FRINGE to apply it to Obama alone. Bush/McCain/the Republican Party accept his place of birth. Why don't you? Шизомби (talk) 05:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer not to get into a big long discussion about this. The blockquoted statement above obviously does not say or imply anything about being foreign-born. Instead, it explains that the subject of the article is respectful of privacy, and has not been blabbing or advertising itself as a presidential birthplace. As I said above, this is "no big deal if you folks want it removed," so let's drop it. Thanks.Ferrylodge (talk) 06:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The Hospital of Obama's Birth is Unconfirmed and Should be Noted as Such

To say that the Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women & Children is the place of Obama's birth is to ignore all of the other legitimate sources that say that Queen's Medical Center is his birthplace. Neither hospital has been confirmed as his place of birth, therefore it is not truthful to state as a fact that he was born at Kapi'olani. On my last edit, I tried to make this page reflect the truth by stating, "The hospital is possibly the birthplace of Barack Obama, President of the United States, though various news reports have also listed The Queen's Medical Center as his birthplace." Snopes.com, one of my sources, recognizes that sources have stated that Obama was born at Queen's and a Nov. 2004 issue of The Rainbow Edition newsletter states that Obama was born at Queen's without any mention of Kapi'olani. There were also many other sources that have stated that Obama was born at Queen's but unfortunately most of those sources have, just within the past week, edited their text to display Kapi'olani instead of Queen's. Interestingly enough, even Wikipedia's page on The Queen's Medical Center had included a note about sources stating that Obama had been born there but just within the last 10 min. has been deleted. To sum it up: 1.) no official confirmation of the hospital of Obama's birth has been made and 2.) legitimate sources have stated that Obama was born at Kapi'olani while other legitimate sources have claimed that he was born at Queen's, therefore no statement of fact should be made on the hospital of his birth and the edit that I had made should be left alone.

User 'guyzero' has deleted by edit and sent me this message: "Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women & Children. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources."

How can a statement suggesting that Obama might have been born at Queen's Medical Center be libelous when legitimate sources say that he has? And yes, guyzero, I did provide proper sources.

My sources for Queen's being listed as his place of birth: The Rainbow Edition newsletter, Nov. 2004, Vol. 2, Issue 3, p. 2. ...and... http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

My sources for the lack of any official confirmation of the hospital of Obama's birth: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/SPECIALOBAMA08 http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/01/obamas-birth-certificate-final-chapter-time-we-mea/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthinyourface (talk • contribs) 20:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

What is "The Rainbow Edition" newsletter? Newsletters are almost never reliable sources. Please see WP:RS. Also, this is a very minor article. I believe, you should take issue with this at the main Obama article, which clearly lists one hospital definitively as his birthplace. That article is very heavily watched, so you can have a conversation with the many regulars who edit that article. If you only edit here, but not Obama's biography, then we create a situation where at one article on Wikipedia we say X, and on another we say Y. We should strive for consistency across the board, and therefore if you want to pursue this matter further, I urge you to take it to a more prominent article. Top down, not bottom up. Thanks. -Andrew c ^[talk] 21:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Snopes is also not a reliable source. The Queen Med Center birthplace is a fringe claim, backed up by fringe or unreliable sources. Adding it to this article violates wikipedia policies with regards to WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:BLP, etc. --guyzero | talk 21:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

How can you say that Kapi'olani is his birthplace, "definitively", as you say, when Obama and the hospital itself refuse to confirm or deny it? I'll admit that the sources I've provided aren't as strong as the sources saying that he was born at Kapi'olani but with the limited information that has been released to the public, there is no way to confirm that he was born at any hospital, anywhere. His certification of live birth only says Honolulu, HI.

Part of the reason that my sources aren't as strong as those supporting Kapi'olani as his birthplace is because so many of them that had previously listed Queen's Medical Center have suddenly changed, within just the last few days to Kapi'olani. An article dated Nov. 2008 from United Press International is just one example. An article on WND details the UPI article's sudden change: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103306

Now, I know you're going to scoff at that link because it's an WND article but just take note of the screenshots showing how the UPI article suddenly changed from Queen's to Kapi'olani.

If you're going to call the Queen's Medical Center birthplace suggestion a "fringe claim" then you're also going to have to the say the same for UPI.com and Snopes.com. Here's a quote from the Wikipedia entry for Snopes, "FactCheck reviewed a sample of Snopes' responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, and found them to be free from bias in all cases." As for UPI, it's staffers have won several Pulitzer Prizes over the years. Do you really consider these two organizations to be on the fringe?

Even if you still say that Queen's Medical Center should not be listed as a possible birthplace for Obama, there's no way you can say definitively that he was born at Kapi'olani since there has been no official confirmation of that. Therefore, I suggest that Queen's be added as a possible birthplace and that Kapi'olani be listed as another possible birthplace. Either that, or just completely remove any suggestion that he was born at either hospital. In fact, it would make more sense to just remove any reference to him being born at any hospital simply because we do not know for sure because no confirmation yet exists. Truthinyourface (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Please go and read the wikipedia policies on how information gets into these articles. The vast overwhelming majority of RS's say Obama was born at Kapi'olani.

UPI corrected their misprint, and the WND "journalists" want to make hay out of this? WND is not a reliable source. Snopes (also not a RS) says Kapi'olani, so debating their merit here won't bring the result you are seeking.

All this crap about the hospital refusing to confirm or deny and there being precious little information released to the public is just hogwash to put it nicely. Privacy laws forbid the hospital from confirming or denying anything. There is plenty of information out there on Obama's life story if you are really so interested in it. --guyzero | talk 01:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This appears to be an artificial, politically-motivated campaign coming from WorldNetDaily.[1] The accounts behind this campaign should be looked at closely, and possibly blocked. Recommend immediate semi-protection of all related articles to prevent new accounts from popping up. Viriditas (talk) 01:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Let me guess, any source that puts Obama in a bad light is not a reliable source, right? The Wikipedia article on Snopes says, "FactCheck reviewed a sample of Snopes' responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, and found them to be free from bias in all cases." FactCheck is a source used quite often here on Wikipedia so I know you guys trust them and FactCheck says that Snopes' responses to political rumors about Obama are "free from bias". Sounds like a reliable source to me.

So if the "vast overwhelming majority of RS's say Obama was born at Kapi'olani", it must be so, right? It makes it even better when a bunch of sites that had opposing statements start scrubbing... I mean correcting their misprints, isn't it? Because now, that majority of RS's suddenly turns into a "vast overwhelming majority" and therefore THE TRUTH! So is this how Wikipedia determines truth? No official confirmation... repeated denies for official confirmation... yet the majority of RS's are in favor of Kapi'olani so let's go with that!

No kidding Snopes says Kapi'olani, guyzero, everyone knows they also "corrected their misprint" just a few days ago but the important part is that they also say that "news accounts have also variously reported his birth as having occurred at Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu." And yes, the hospitals are claiming that privacy laws are preventing them from confirming it, so obviously you agree with me, that his birth at Kapi'olani has NOT BEEN CONFIRMED. It's interesting to note, however, that Obama doesn't have to abide by these privacy laws and can confirm the hospital at any time he wants but for some reason will not do so. And until someone confirms it, Wikipedia should not be stating it as fact, because it's not. A preponderance of RS's does not make fact! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthinyourface (talk • contribs) 03:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is quite confirmed. We're really not in the business of peddling conspiracy theory here, so there is really little to be gained by pursuing this line of attack. Tarc (talk) 03:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Just because you say it's confirmed, doesn't make it so. The hospital has denied to confirm it and so has the Obama administration. Wouldn't you agree? And if that's the case, which it is, then how can you say it's confirmed, because a bunch of people in Honolulu think so? Truthinyourface (talk) 16:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:TALK and WP:NOTFORUM This is not the place to discuss this. Please stay strictly on the subject of this article and specifically content to be added, removed, or edited. Brothejr (talk) 16:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This isn't the place to discuss whether the comment about Obama being born at Kapi'olani should be removed? What? And then you say that I should "stay strictly on the subject of this article and specifically content to be added, removed, or edited." What do you think we're talking about? We're discussing whether the statement about Obama being born at Kapi'olani (aka content) should be removed or edited. Truthinyourface (talk) 19:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

No one here is interested in tinfoil conspiracies, as they have no relevance here, and they already receive sufficient coverage over at Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories‎. This is simply an article about a hospital in Hawaii. This hospital also happens to be notable, as it is the birthplace of Barack Obama, a fact noted and sourced in this article. So no, we're not discussing "whether the statement...should be removed or edited", as it will not be. I hope this clears some things up for you. Tarc (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not a fact if the two most important parties, namely Barack Obama and Kapi'olani, refuse to even confirm it. All you have are some reliable sources suggesting that they believe it's Kapi'olani. There are also reliable sources suggesting that it's Queen's. So it is not a fact and I'm just trying to edit the article to reflect that. I hope this clears some things for you. BenSpecter (talk) 22:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The State of Hawaii has already confirmed the birth. The hospitals are prohibited from confirming or denying anything due to privacy laws. This has been explained to you many times. WP:ICANTHEARYOU applies. Viriditas (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

You mean the state of Hawaii has confirmed that Obama was born at Kapi'olani? Please give me the link to that reliable source. As far as I know, the state of Hawaii has only confirmed that Obama was born in Honolulu but does not state which hospital. So no, the hospital has not been confirmed. Try again. BenSpecter (talk) 22:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

You know very well that that a copy of the birth certificate was released to the public for analysis. I'm sorry that you don't like it, but this isn't Birtherpedia. Viriditas (talk) 22:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Who's talking about a birth certificate? Not me. Only you. I had said that no one has confirmed that Obama was born at Kapi'olani. You said that the state of Hawaii has confirmed his birth, no kidding. I'm not arguing that. Do you see what I'm saying? So I ask you again, are you saying that the state of Hawaii has confirmed that Obama was born at Kapi'olani, and if so, please provide the evidence. BenSpecter (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

As stated approx 2 inches above your question, the state and the hospital cannot release any information due to privacy laws. This is true for everyone, not just Barack Obama. thanks, --guyzero | talk 22:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

So you're saying that the state and hospital cannot confirm his birth at Kapi'olani, right? No joke, I've been saying that all along. So the fact is: no official has confirmed his birth at Kapi'olani, including Obama himself, who is not bound by privacy laws. So essentially you're saying that because a majority of RS's indicate Kapi'olani, we therefore at Wikipedia, will state as a fact that he was born there, even though there has been no official confirmation. Is that what Wikipedia calls a fact? I've seen the letter, supposedly from Obama, that was placed on the Kapi'olani website where he states that he was born there. I would love for that letter to be confirmed by Obama, because then we would have official confirmation that he was born there. However, even after being asked specifically about it, the Obama admin. has refused to confirm it and until the confirm his birth there, it cannot be stated as fact. BenSpecter (talk) 23:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

"because a majority of RS's indicate Kapi'olani, we therefore at Wikipedia, will state as a fact that he was born there" - BenSpecter

Yes, that is exactly it. Tarc (talk) 23:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad we cleared that up. This would naturally prevent any opposing view from even being listed as a possibility, which is exactly what you've done time and time again with my edits, simply because the majority of RS's do not agree with it or because of your own political biases. The people of Wikipedia are clearly more interested in making absolutist statements rather than reflecting the controversial nature of an issue, especially when it comes to anything that has to do with Barack Obama.

Therefore, a highly controversial issue with RS's on both sides making completely different statements, can be completely whitewashed so that it appears to be controversy free. The side that reaches that magical threshold of having a majority of RS's then becomes fact and all opposing viewpoints are banned and any hint of controversy removed. Yes, Tarc, you've confirmed my beliefs about Wikipedia. Thank you. BenSpecter (talk) 00:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

BenSpecter, please read WP:V WP:RS and WP:NPOV -- these are the wikipedia policies that inform these edits. The vast majority, including Obama himself, of reliable sources say clearly and plainly that he was born at Kapi'olani. A relative few reliable sources have said Queens. Of those few, many have issued public corrections that they had misprinted, and issued a correction to say Kapi'olani. If we see a preponderance of reliable sources state something as fact, then it is a fact. Therefore, per the policies above (go read them), it is Kapi'olani. In this article, we don't discuss the birther allegation that it may be another hospital (or not in Honolulu), or that there has been no official confirmation from the hospital, or that UPI "scrubbed" Queens as part of some vast conspiracy, because both the quantity and the quality of the sources that cover those issues is relatively low or that information is blatantly false or discredited by actual reliable sources. More info at WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE.

Calling what we do here "scrubbing" is silly. This is not much different than saying that the Earth is "allegedly" round because some fringy, debunked sources say that it is flat. Sure, the "controversy" exists, but it casts no serious doubt on proven reality. In terms of Kapi'olani, there is also no doubt on this issue in terms of our policies.

Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories does provide a well-sourced article that documents the various allegations that you advocate.

Hope this helps. Please don't treat this page as a forum to discuss how much you would love to see some letter confirmed or to advocate for the release of a birth certificate as we can't help you with either. Please refrain from commenting on your perception of editor intentions as well as it just makes you look bad. thanks, --guyzero | talk 00:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

You state, "A relative few reliable sources have said Queens" and then shortly thereafter you make an analogy that compares these "few reliable sources" to "fringy, debunked sources", directly contradicting yourself. So it's "reliable sources" when you want to be honest and "fringy, debunked sources" when you just want to dismiss the issue.

When you say that Obama says that he was born at Kapi'olani, you must referring to his purported letter to the Kapi'olani hospital. Unfortunately, both Obama and Kapi'olani have refused to confirm that it was his letter, so obviously you cannot say that the letter is his. At least not if you want to be truthful. So no, Obama has not confirmed that he was born at Kapi'olani. How many times do I have to show you this before you will understand it? You say that Obama says that he was born at Kapi'olani. Please link me to the RS that shows this.

I understand that, at Wikipedia, a fact is determined based upon a preponderance of reliable sources. I've already explained why I disagree with that. What makes that policy even more egregious is when the main parties involved have not confirmed it as fact (the hospital and Obama) but Wikipedia decides to confirm it for them because of a preponderance of reliable sources while also dismissing any opposing views simply because they do not meet the requirement of having a preponderance of reliable sources.

Once again, my position has nothing to do with the conspiracy theory page you're referring to because I'm not questioning his citizenship concerning the hospitals, at least not here, of course. You guys keep bringing that up as a means of dismissing everything that I say on this issue. Please stop referring to my position as that of a citizenship conspiracy theory, it just makes you look bad. BenSpecter (talk) 01:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Can we slow this down a second. What are the reliable sources that are still saying "Queens" as the birthplace? If we have notable, reliable sources saying so, and it doesn't fall under undue weight, then of course it should be mentioned. But I have yet to see these sources which have been referred to multiple times above. -Andrew c ^[talk] 01:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, there were quite a few RS's reporting that he was born at Queen's, until about a week ago. Since that time United Press International changed a story published in Nov. 2008 to list Kapi'olani as his birthplace instead of Queen's with no explanation for this change, as far as I know (screenshots here: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103306.

Snopes did the same thing but left this caveat, "News accounts have also variously reported his birth as having occurred at Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu." (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp)

So right now, the main sources left would be: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp ...and... http://genealogy.about.com/od/aframertrees/p/barack_obama.htm

The About.com link is the same link that was given as a reliable source when, from Feb. 2008 to Oct. 2008, Wikipedia's page on Queen's Medical Center still listed Obama as having been born there. In fact, this was the only source named during this time.

I'm not saying that Obama was born at Queen's, I'm just saying that it appears to be a realistic possibility that is backed up by RS' and should not be ignored, especially considering the fact no official has ever confirmed that he was born at Kapi'olani.

The statement that Obama was born at Kapi'olani should not be made definitively, and should instead include a statement that Queen's has also been reported as having been Obama's birthplace in a way similar to what Snopes has done. BenSpecter (talk) 02:41, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a week ago, that information would have been appropriate for this article. In a week, who knows, the about.com page may be changed as well. The snopes.com information doesn't seem reliable because it's self-published, and doesn't cite any of the "variously reported" news accounts. If these news accounts exist, we should be able to access them, right? Going on the two links you provided, I don't believe we need to alter anything we have currently on Wikipedia. -Andrew c ^[talk] 03:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The Reference to Obama's Birth Hospital Should be Deleted Altogether

For the reasons stated in the discussion above, there is no reason to include any reference to Obama's birthplace in this article about Kapli'olani. Although alleged "reliable sources" are cited, none of those sources themselves identifies the primary source (Obama's statement or supporting documentation) of the claim that the hospital is his birthplace. The Washington Post article is particularly unreliable because it asserts that Obama was walking beneath the very room under which he was born. The room number has never been identified anywhere, and due to construction and renovations and relocations of the various Kapli'olani facilities there is no evidence that the room even still exists (if indeed Obama was born there).

Wikipedia cautions that "Encyclopedia content must be VERIFIABLE." No verification has been made regarding the hospital in which Obama was born. I rather doubt that it has been made of the hospitals in which other American presidents have been born, and for that reason I do not see references to particular hospitals in the article of other presidents. It is clear that the ONLY reason an exception is being made for the inclusion of Obama's name in this instance is to blunt debate over the birthplace debate by providing a particular detail (the hospital) which will convince the casual reader that the exact location, and not just the state, has been pinned down.

It is verified. Plenty of reliable sources have stated as much. Tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories from some birther's blog don't change that fact. --Loonymonkey (talk) 23:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

TruthfulPerson (talk) 23:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)Looneymonkey:: Please observe Wikipedia's civility standards or your privileges may be suspended. You have not provided any verification as to whether Obama was born at the Kapli'olani Medical Center for Women and Children. Nor do you address the problem that none of the so-called "reliable sources" have provided verification of any sort (or even attribution of a person making the claim) in any of their articles. Your use of derogatory references to "tinfoil hat conspiracies" does not shed any light on what is a very straightforward factual question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.146.146 (talk)

Please sign your posts with 4 tildes for click on the signature button on the toolbar, and please do not make threats against other users. As for the topic here, there are sources given in this article regarding Obama's hospital of birth. Again, the viewpoint that he was born elsewhere is one that resides wholly within the realm of conspiracy theory and fringe sourcing. As such, it will not be appearing in this article. Tarc (talk) 23:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

TruthfulPerson (talk) 23:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)LooneyMonkey, please do not mischaracterize my accurate statements of published Wikipedia policy as "threats." Thank you for avoiding invective in your most recent post. However, you have unfortunately continued to avoid the precise point I have made: the sources cited (1) do not attribute the claim of Kapli'olani as a birthplace to Obama or any other person and (2) the sources do not identify documents or any other corroborating evidence for the assertion. Accordingly, the assertion is no more "verified" than that former assertion that he was born in Queens Medical Center, or the assertion I could make that he was born in the New York University Medical Center.

Please also do me the courtesy of actually reading what I've said. I did not (contrary to your assertion) suggest that "the viewpoint that he was born elsewhere" appear in this article. I proposed that the unsourced and unverified claim that he was born in the Kapli'olani Medical Center for Women and Children be removed, consistent with the practice used for other United States Presidents. Please note that your credibility as an arbiter of this very narrow factual dispute is severely compromised when you cannot even accurately recite what has been proposed a few lines before your comment.