Talk:Barack Obama

There is nothing about Crimea crisis

Did you notice that there is NOTHING in the article about Crimea crisis and Obama's role (reaction) on it? Is not it important thing (?) (the main International event on 2014). M.Karelin (talk) 13:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

No, it is not an important event in the life of Barack Obama. Moreover, it is not the main international event of 2014 (Ebola and ISIS are vying for that spot). Sorry, but it just doesn't make the cut. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

• Ebola and ISIS are more important then Crimea crisis? Really? M.Karelin (talk) 18:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Do you really have to ask that...? --Somchai Sun (talk) 20:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
    • Crimea is one component of the larger Eastern Ukraine/Ukraine/Russia crisis going on that certainly has importance, and possible long term implications with EU/West-Russia relations. That said, as a 2014 international event, it is one with two principle direct actors, Ukraine and Russia. Others may have some words to say or the occasional economic sanction, but that's about it in terms of direct action. Ebola affects more nations directly, and has far more international and global involvement. ISIS has more still, with direct military action from more than a dozen countries spread across the Middle East, Europe, North America, etc. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 20:45, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

It's not a matter of not making the cut. This is an article about a living person and so must be focused on Obama's life. Crimea might be relevant to the Presidency of Barack Obama article. SMP0328. (talk) 18:33, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

• I did notice that, and also there is no mention of the Crimea River invasion. Though I do agree it's better mentioned in the Presidency article, until it's clearly significant for a personal bio. Dave Dial (talk) 21:56, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Unless the USA is in the habit of sticking its nose in other people's business, problems in Crimea have nothing to do with it or its president. HiLo48 (talk) 06:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. The USA is in that habit, yes, although more charitably it could be called dealing with hot issues elsewhere in the world when it suits American interests and the local and regional powers are either unable to help or part of the problem. The interest for the US and rest of the world would be to check Russian nationalism and expansionism, and to avoid the potential of it becoming a wider European conflict. The point isn't that it is not an issue for the US, but that it is not specifically a huge issue for the US in comparison with a number of other international matters, nor is it directly related so far to the biography of the President. - Wikidemon (talk) 08:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

And if Putin ever does attempt to 'reacquire the Ukraine', Crimea could be seen as sort of a Sudetenland of the situation by many. But right now, we don't have a crystal ball. Nobody knows for sure if Putin will try to move and expand Russia, or if there is sufficient opposition in Russia and other parts of Europe. In the eyes of many USA people, somebody else should start 'smacking hands' in these situations. Dave Dial (talk) 11:15, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Nonetheless, even if this turns into Sudetenland, it is not appropriate for this biography - an article about Obama's whole life - unless something happens about the event and specifically Obama's response to it. Yes, maybe the article about the presidency. Tvoz/talk 19:52, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Article too long...

Article is 255k today, takes 20 seconds to load it. Would anyone please condense the article, in any way? --Corriebertus (talk) 11:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Up at the top of this page is a FAQ section. If you expand that, question #10 addresses article length. The article is at the upper limit of recommended article length, and occasionally the massive number of templates, categories, etc., causes a speed problem either at the server end or for your device. The problem is that there isn't much that can be cut out, in fact it's all we can do to keep up with events by adding new material and trying to find something to shorten or remove. Wikipedia is not optimized for extremely low internet speeds but there may be some viewers or mobile apps that are. - Wikidemon (talk) 20:49, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Took about 7 seconds for me, and I live in a rural area with poor internet speeds. Browser issue? --Somchai Sun (talk) 21:45, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Obama....the first African-American President ... really?

Please, stop referring to Obama as African-American and to him being the first African-American President. First, Obama is NOT African-American, he is half white and half African-American, and second, it might be of the Democrats interest to be able to make the claim of first African-American president, but it is not the truth. I am African-American and I find it an insult to refer to Obama as being of my race and heritage.2001:5B0:2DFF:2EF0:0:0:0:3E (talk) 23:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC) Kat Dollase

Please see the answer to question 2 in the FAQ section at the top of this talk page. -- Scjessey (talk) 00:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

While not everybody agree about how African-American should be defined, I´ve never come across a definition that says that Barack Obama, Sr. is African-American and Barack Hussein Obama II is not. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:10, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Because Pres Obama's father was not an American in the slightest. --Somchai Sun (talk) 09:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree (well, he lived there for awhile), but the OP states that Obama Jr is "half African-American". Nevermind, it´s not important. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, so long as the OP is comfortable claiming ownership of African-American racial identity, then I'm sure he/she will appreciate that Wiki defers to however people self-describe, which is "African American," in Obama's case. (PS, why does this one issue generate such perpetual intense pearl-clutching among O detractors???). AgentOrangeTabby (talk) 01:29, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Many groups are referred to by their ethnicity and or nationality and "race", and oftentimes, if there are multiple of these, they will be referred to by that which is more in the minority. In the United States, there are less African Americans than whites. I'm sure he'd be the first "white" president if all the U.S. presidents and the founders had been from Africa. Dustin (talk) 04:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

...and if 40 years ago it was impossible to conceive of there ever being a white president. HiLo48 (talk) 07:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Community Organizer Label

The term has been so often used as a disparagement to the specific subject of the article that it is hardly NPOV anymore. Usually put in scare quotes to suggest to certain NPOV parties that somehow the work was illegitimate or even nefarious. Vote to re-label section "Non-profit work and Harvard Law School." "Non-profit" is wholly accurate and there could hardly be a more neutral term. The fact that the label is repeated three times in a short paragraph provides evidence that the intent of the authors is a covert labelling (smear) mechanism instead of plain bad writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.25.13.90 (talk) 13:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I couldn't disagree more. The term is used in this article because it was used extensively by reliable sources, and by Barack Obama himself. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Ditto Scjessey. Community organizer is exactly right and not at all disparaging in our article. That some extremists use it disparagingly is not relevant here - they disparage all kinds of normal usage. Tvoz/talk 19:23, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

See also

The "see also" section on this article. Is it really necessary? Discuss. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:21, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Either there was a mass extinction I somehow missed, or nobody has an opinion about whether or not this article needs a "see also" section. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:34, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

"Meh". Adding one wouldn't really add or take anything away from the article...It might be useful to some. One has to scroll down only a little more to see the three collapsible boxes that are chock-full of just about any link you could ever need... (And I dunno, maybe most of this page's contributors are located in Buffalo?) --Somchai Sun (talk) 13:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't find a "see also" to be very useful for biographies. Tarc (talk) 14:06, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

• I don't know if its necessary or better one way or the other. Certainly the article is large enough as is, and there are plenty of article links inside the article already. So put me down as a 'meh' too. Dave Dial (talk) 14:08, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

  Well I lean toward getting rid of it. It seems superfluous to me, and the article is already pretty unwieldy. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I added the section as a place for article links that aren't present elsewhere in the article. Going through the article again, however, I found the link from "44th" to "List of Presidents...". So, I now agree that the "See also" section isn't needed in this article, and will remove it. WCCasey (talk) 22:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

...or not. Now others have added to the section, so removal or rearrangement needs to be a consensus. The 2 article links aren't needed, but I don't know where else to put the portal link. WCCasey (talk) 23:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Bias about his house

Current version

Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, Chicago.[351] The purchase of an adjacent lot—and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer, campaign donor and friend Tony Rezko—attracted media attention because of Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction on political corruption charges that were unrelated to Obama.[352]

This is biased.

A biased version the other way could read: Obama is evil. He and corrupt Rezko had a deal for his house. Rezko was subsequently indicted.

A neutral version should improve on the following...

1. I do not see in the references that the book deal paid for the house. Who made that determination? The reference says the book deal paid for law school and campaign costs. Conclusion: FALSE INFORMATION IN WIKIPEDIA

2. There is no mention of the facts of the controversy, that the price was a special deal that Rezko offered. At least, that's what the (#352) reference says.

Possible better version

The Obama family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, Chicago.[351] The purchase of an adjacent lot—and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer, campaign donor and friend Tony Rezko—attracted media attention because of because of the price that Rezko sold it to Obama, which Obama called a "boneheaded" "mistake" and Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction on political corruption charges that were unrelated to Obama.[352]