Talk:Barack Obama: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Barack Obama/Archive 79) (bot |
→Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2015: new section |
||
| Line 198: | Line 198: | ||
How about a hyperlink to the city of Chicago. Throughout the article there are hyperlinks to other places and instituitions, but when the word Chicago comes up, there is no hyperlink, not throughout the entire article. This is very strange and should be changed. Afterall, this is where his political career began, where he spent a large portion of his life, and what he considers his hometown. It's ogg Wikipedia choses to have no hyperlinks to Chicago whatsoever. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/216.251.112.134|216.251.112.134]] ([[User talk:216.251.112.134|talk]]) 01:09, 8 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
How about a hyperlink to the city of Chicago. Throughout the article there are hyperlinks to other places and instituitions, but when the word Chicago comes up, there is no hyperlink, not throughout the entire article. This is very strange and should be changed. Afterall, this is where his political career began, where he spent a large portion of his life, and what he considers his hometown. It's ogg Wikipedia choses to have no hyperlinks to Chicago whatsoever. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/216.251.112.134|216.251.112.134]] ([[User talk:216.251.112.134|talk]]) 01:09, 8 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:{{Done}}. Thanks for catching the oversight.--[[User:JayJasper|JayJasper]] ([[User talk:JayJasper|talk]]) 02:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
:{{Done}}. Thanks for catching the oversight.--[[User:JayJasper|JayJasper]] ([[User talk:JayJasper|talk]]) 02:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2015 == |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Barack Obama|answered=no}} |
|||
<!-- Begin request --> |
|||
Barack Obama place of birth. |
|||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQcd41RO25k |
|||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH4GX3Otf14 |
|||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqrTsz1wQIM |
|||
you have his birth place wrong he was not born in the usa he was born in kenyan the 3 videos above obama says he was born in kenyan and so did his wife. |
|||
<!-- End request --> |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/108.180.154.228|108.180.154.228]] ([[User talk:108.180.154.228|talk]]) 08:23, 12 January 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 08:23, 12 January 2015
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Barack Obama article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83 |
|
Special discussion pages: |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Template:Community article probation
Frequently asked questions
Family and religious background Q1: Why isn't Barack Obama's Muslim heritage or education included in this article?
A1: Barack Obama was never a practitioner of Islam. His biological father having been "raised as a Muslim" but being a "confirmed atheist" by the time Obama was born is mentioned in the article. Please see this article on Snopes.com for a fairly in-depth debunking of the myth that Obama is Muslim. Barack Obama did not attend an Islamic or Muslim school while living in Indonesia age 6–10, but Roman Catholic and secular public schools. See [1], [2], [3] The sub-articles Public image of Barack Obama and Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories address this issue. Q2: The article refers to him as African American, but his mother is white and his black father was not an American. Should he be called African American, or something else ("biracial", "mixed", "Kenyan-American", "mulatto", "quadroon", etc.)?
A2: Obama himself and the media identify him, the vast majority of the time, as African American or black. African American is primarily defined as "citizens or residents of the United States who have origins in any of the black populations of Africa", a statement that accurately describes Obama and does not preclude or negate origins in the white populations of America as well. Thus we use the term African American in the introduction, and address the specifics of his parentage in the first headed section of the article. Many individuals who identify as black have varieties of ancestors from many countries who may identify with other racial or ethnic groups. See our article on race for more information on this concept. We could call him the first "biracial" candidate or the first "half black half white" candidate or the first candidate with a parent born in Africa, but Wikipedia is a tertiary source which reports what other reliable sources say, and most of those other sources say "first African American". Readers will learn more detail about his ethnic background in the article body. Q3: Why can't we use his full name outside of the lead? It's his name, isn't it?
A3: The relevant part of the Manual of Style says that outside the lead of an article on a person, that person's conventional name is the only one that's appropriate. (Thus one use of "Richard Milhous Nixon" in the lead of Richard Nixon, "Richard Nixon" thereafter.) Talk page consensus has also established this. Q4: Why is Obama referred to as "Barack Hussein Obama II" in the lead sentence rather than "Barack Hussein Obama, Jr."? Isn't "Jr." more common?
A4: Although "Jr." is typically used when a child shares the name of his or her parent, "II" is considered acceptable, as well. And in Obama's case, the usage on his birth certificate is indeed "II", and is thus the form used at the beginning of this article, per manual of style guidelines on names. Q5: Why don't we cover the claims that Obama is not a United States citizen, his birth certificate was forged, he was not born in Hawaii, he is ineligible to be President, etc?
A5: The Barack Obama article consists of an overview of major issues in the life and times of the subject. The controversy over his eligibility, citizenship, birth certificate etc is currently a fairly minor issue in overall terms, and has had no significant legal or mainstream political impact. It is therefore not currently appropriate for inclusion in an overview article. These claims are covered separately in Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories. Controversies, praise, and criticism Q6: Why isn't there a criticisms/controversies section?
A6: Because a section dedicated to criticisms and controversies is no more appropriate than a section dedicated solely to praise and is an indication of a poorly written article. Criticisms/controversies/praises should be worked into the existing prose of the article, per the Criticism essay. Q7: Why isn't a certain controversy/criticism/praise included in this article?
A7: Wikipedia's Biography of living persons policy says that "[c]riticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to take sides; it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone." Criticism or praise that cannot be reliably sourced cannot be placed in a biography. Also, including everything about Obama in a single article would exceed Wikipedia's article size restrictions. A number of sub-articles have been created and some controversies/criticisms/praises have been summarized here or been left out of this article altogether, but are covered in some detail in the sub-articles. Q8: But this controversy/criticism/praise is all over the news right now! It should be covered in detail in the main article, not buried in a sub-article!
A8: Wikipedia articles should avoid giving undue weight to something just because it is in the news right now. If you feel that the criticism/controversy/praise is not being given enough weight in this article, you can try to start a discussion on the talk page about giving it more. See WP:BRD. Q9: This article needs much more (or much less) criticism/controversy.
A9: Please try to assume good faith. Like all articles on Wikipedia, this article is a work in progress so it is possible for biases to exist at any point in time. If you see a bias that you wish to address, you are more than welcome to start a new discussion, or join in an existing discussion, but please be ready to provide sources to support your viewpoint and try to keep your comments civil. Starting off your discussion by accusing the editors of this article of having a bias is the quickest way to get your comment ignored. Talk and article mechanics Q10: This article is over 275kb long, and the article size guideline says that it should be broken up into sub-articles. Why hasn't this happened?
A10: The restriction mentioned in WP:SIZE is 60kB of readable prose, not the byte count you see when you open the page for editing. As of May 11, 2016, this article had about 10,570 words of readable prose (65 kB according to prosesize tool), only slightly above the guideline. The rest is mainly citations and invisible comments, which do not count towards the limit. Q11: I notice this FAQ mentions starting discussions or joining in on existing discussions a lot. If Wikipedia is supposed to be the encyclopedia anyone can edit, shouldn't I just be bold and fix any biases that I see in the article?
A11: It is true that Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit and no one needs the permission of other editors of this article to make changes to it. But Wikipedia policy is that, "While the consensus process does not require posting to the discussion page, it can be useful and is encouraged." This article attracts editors that have very strong opinions about Obama (positive and negative) and these editors have different opinions about what should and should not be in the article, including differences as to appropriate level of detail. As a result of this it may be helpful, as a way to avoid content disputes, to seek consensus before adding contentious material to or removing it from the article. Q12: The article/talk page has been vandalized! Why hasn't anyone fixed this?
A12: Many editors watch this article, and it is unlikely that vandalism would remain unnoticed for long. It is possible that you are viewing a cached result of the article; If so, try bypassing your cache. Q13: Why are so many discussions closed so quickly?
A13: Swift closure is common for topics that have already been discussed repeatedly, topics pushing fringe theories, and topics that would lead to violations of Wikipedia's policy concerning biographies of living persons, because of their disruptive nature and the unlikelihood that consensus to include the material will arise from the new discussion. In those cases, editors are encouraged to read this FAQ for examples of such common topics. Q14: I added new content to the article, but it was removed!
A14: Double-check that your content addition is not sourced to an opinion blog, editorial, or non-mainstream news source. Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons states, in part, "Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable third-party sources, it may include original research and unverifiable statements, and could lead to libel claims." Sources of information must be of a very high quality for biographies. While this does not result in an outright ban of all blogs and opinion pieces, most of them are regarded as questionable. Inflammatory or potentially libelous content cited to a questionable source will be removed immediately without discussion. Q15: I disagree with the policies and content guidelines that prevent my proposed content from being added to the article.
A15: That's understandable. Wikipedia is a work in progress. If you do not approve of a policy cited in the removal of content, it's possible to change it. Making cogent, logical arguments on the policy's talk page is likely to result in a positive alteration. This is highly encouraged. However, this talk page is not the appropriate place to dispute the wording used in policies and guidelines. If you disagree with the interpretation of a policy or guideline, there is also recourse: Dispute resolution. Using the dispute resolution process prevents edit wars, and is encouraged. Q16: I saw someone start a discussion on a topic raised by a blog/opinion piece, and it was reverted!
A16: Unfortunately, due to its high profile, this talk page sees a lot of attempts to argue for policy- and guideline-violating content – sometimes the same violations many times a day. These are regarded as disruptive, as outlined above. Consensus can change; material previously determined to be unacceptable may become acceptable. But it becomes disruptive and exhausting when single-purpose accounts raise the same subject(s) repeatedly in the apparent hopes of overcoming significant objections by other editors. Editors have reached a consensus for dealing with this behavior:
Other Q17: Why aren't the 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns covered in more detail?
A17: They are, in sub-articles called Barack Obama 2008 presidential campaign and Barack Obama 2012 presidential campaign. Things that are notable in the context of the presidential campaigns, but are of minimal notability to Barack Obama's overall biography, belong in the sub-articles. Campaign stops, the presidential debates, and the back-and-forth accusations and claims of the campaigns can all be found there. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
 | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Template:WikiProject CD-People Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
 | This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration was copied or moved into Barack Obama with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Cuba and 2014
Shouldn't the developments of Cuba be added to the opening paragraph? Seems that would be a pretty monumental accomplishment. Also, seeing as how the opening already mentions the Republican takeover of the House in the 2010 elections, wouldn't it complete that picture to add in a similar reference in the opening to the Republican takeover of Congress overall in 2014? 2602:306:8343:5980:B9F2:F973:7411:6ED0 (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- The section on Cuba is far, far too long for this summary style article, and much of it is superfluous with respect to the life of Barack Obama. I suggest that the entire section be moved to Presidency of Barack Obama (where there is currently nothing), and be replaced by a one or two sentence summary. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- Since nobody has objected, I have moved this section to Presidency of Barack Obama. Perhaps someone can whip up a brief summary (one or two sentences, max) to replace it? -- Scjessey (talk) 17:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
References
Sigh. These shouldn't be here, to be honest. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Nobel Peace Prize
The Nobel Peace Prize for Obama is heavily critized everywhere, maybe this should be mentioned. Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=obama+peace+prize — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.244.130 (talk) 18:50, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
I would agree, except that there isn't any readily visible mentions of or links to "criticism" of Obama anywhere on his page here at all, so what does it matter? For anyone who doesn't know any better, he's never had any criticisms, nor any controversies or scandals during his entire presidency. Isn't it amazing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BCB0:7600:18A4:1147:C08A:4F3C (talk) 08:28, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- You're really funny. You should do stand-up comedy, or something. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:40, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Pronunciation
Can it UK pronunciation be sourced? Need it be? I put a cn-tag on it, but it was removed. Is it relevant at all to give a UK-pronunciation for an American? ––St.nerol (talk) 00:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm from the UK, and I pronounce it the way it is supposed to be pronounced. There's no need for the Wikipedia article to show alternative pronunciations for people who don't know better. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- I was thinking something like that. So shouldn't the least one could ask be some reliable source saying that it is dominant and generally acceptable in UK to have a differing pronunciation? -St.nerol (talk) 15:30, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- I found the opposite in the BBC Pronunciation Guide: "His name should be pronounced buh-RAAK oh-BAA-muh." ––St.nerol (talk) 16:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- It is completely unnecessary. There is only one way to pronounce his name (which we give). I can understand giving alternatives for things that are said differently depending on markets (such as Hyundai), but not for someone's name. Wikipedia doesn't provide alternatives for Adolf Hitler, even though some people say adɔlf or eɪdɔlf instead of ˈadɔlf. Very few people mispronounce it in the UK, as I said earlier, and most people who were getting it wrong now pronounce it correctly. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- Well, we agree with each other, but some people obviously don't, so isn't it a good idea to support the pronunciation with a citation, when we have one served? -St.nerol (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- (However it is with Hitler, Wp does provide an alternative pronunciaion e.g. for Martin Luther, very far from the German one.) ––St.nerol (talk) 15:23, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- It is completely unnecessary. There is only one way to pronounce his name (which we give). I can understand giving alternatives for things that are said differently depending on markets (such as Hyundai), but not for someone's name. Wikipedia doesn't provide alternatives for Adolf Hitler, even though some people say adɔlf or eɪdɔlf instead of ˈadɔlf. Very few people mispronounce it in the UK, as I said earlier, and most people who were getting it wrong now pronounce it correctly. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly with Scjessey here - there is no need for this, and there is no consensus for this addition. Discuss if you like, but please don't re-add to the article without consensus. Tvoz/talk 07:36, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
More information
I want more about the Dunham ancestors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.238.140.10 (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Family of Barack Obama and Ann Dunham would be the places to go for this. --Somchai Sun (talk) 15:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hyperlink
How about a hyperlink to the city of Chicago. Throughout the article there are hyperlinks to other places and instituitions, but when the word Chicago comes up, there is no hyperlink, not throughout the entire article. This is very strange and should be changed. Afterall, this is where his political career began, where he spent a large portion of his life, and what he considers his hometown. It's ogg Wikipedia choses to have no hyperlinks to Chicago whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.251.112.134 (talk) 01:09, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for catching the oversight.--JayJasper (talk) 02:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2015
 | It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Barack Obama. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
Barack Obama place of birth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQcd41RO25k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH4GX3Otf14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqrTsz1wQIM
you have his birth place wrong he was not born in the usa he was born in kenyan the 3 videos above obama says he was born in kenyan and so did his wife. 108.180.154.228 (talk) 08:23, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- Biography articles of living people
- Active politicians
- FA-Class biography articles
- FA-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Top-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- FA-Class U.S. Congress articles
- High-importance U.S. Congress articles
- WikiProject U.S. Congress persons
- FA-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
- High-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
- FA-Class Hawaii articles
- Mid-importance Hawaii articles
- WikiProject Hawaii articles
- FA-Class Kansas articles
- Mid-importance Kansas articles
- WikiProject Kansas articles
- FA-Class Chicago articles
- Top-importance Chicago articles
- WikiProject Chicago articles
- FA-Class African diaspora articles
- Mid-importance African diaspora articles
- WikiProject African diaspora articles
- FA-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- FA-Class Africa articles
- Mid-importance Africa articles
- FA-Class Kenya articles
- Low-importance Kenya articles
- WikiProject Kenya articles
- WikiProject Africa articles
- FA-Class United States articles
- Top-importance United States articles
- FA-Class United States articles of Top-importance
- FA-Class District of Columbia articles
- High-importance District of Columbia articles
- WikiProject District of Columbia articles
- FA-Class United States presidential elections articles
- Top-importance United States presidential elections articles
- WikiProject United States presidential elections articles
- FA-Class U.S. Presidents articles
- Top-importance U.S. Presidents articles
- WikiProject U.S. Presidents articles
- FA-Class US State Legislatures articles
- Low-importance US State Legislatures articles
- WikiProject US State Legislatures articles
- FA-Class United States Government articles
- Low-importance United States Government articles
- WikiProject United States Government articles
- United States articles used on portals
- WikiProject United States articles
- FA-Class New York (state) articles
- Low-importance New York (state) articles
- FA-Class Columbia University articles
- High-importance Columbia University articles
- WikiProject Columbia University articles
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press
- Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests