Jump to content

Talk:James Buchanan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rockgenre (talk | contribs) at 22:09, 20 December 2011 (Are the LGBT project and portal really necessary here?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Wikipedia CD selection

Question about factual statement

I have a question about the following statement in the article.

Buchanan remains most recent of the two Democrats (the other being Martin Van Buren) to succeed a fellow Democrat to the Presidency via election in his own right.

To cite two cases that seem to contradict this, Truman and Johnson both won elections to be president and both succeeded fellow Democrats. I think the author means the most recent who did not originally come into office upon assassination, but that is not the literal statement made.

A minor point perhaps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noetsi (talkcontribs) 22:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It says "to succeed a Democrat via election in his own right" right there. The situation you describe is "to succeed a Democrat via the predecessor's death followed by election in his own right" actually. OCNative (talk) 03:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He lived in the James Buchanan Hotel?

From November 5, 2009 to June 2, 2010, this article stated:

He spent his childhood living in the James Buchanan Hotel

For 7 months, nobody thought to edit that? Brings to question the Reliability of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jms2000 (talkcontribs) 18:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look at the article James Buchanan Hotel, there is a citation that confirms that statement. I'm not an expert on James Buchanan, but the citation looks reasonable. 68.100.146.5 (talk) 00:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Birth Date

The article says Buchanan was born on April 23, but the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission web site says it was April 21. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.143.253.141 (talk) 21:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Split section: Presidency of James Buchanan

Two reasons I propose the split:

  1. The article establishes throughout that his presidency was one of the most significant and consequential in U.S. history, in that he presided over (and incited) a series of clashes over slavery that all culminated in secession, which also happened on his watch. The article cites Buchanan's status as among the worst (and in many polls the worst) President in history, and the historical consensus that his secession policies were the biggest presidential mistake in history. All of this is substantial enough in presidential history to warrant its own page, isn't it?
  1. The Presidency section is already over half the article, and there's quite a bit of his presidency that's left out of it: controversy around the makeup of his cabinet; foreign policy, including intrigues with Britain and Latin America; the administration's dealing with the Panic of 1857; etc. It's stuff that deserves inclusion and would make the Presidency section even longer and more capable of standing on its own as an article.

Thoughts? Msclguru (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest a separate section under America Civil War for that, in the events leading to section. To be honest, every time I've looked into his administration, he was an utter nightmare. Sorry for the lack of signature, but I am extremely infrequent in contributions to Wikipedia, I'm way too verbose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.16.223 (talk) 05:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Counties named after Buchanan

The article says that Buchanan County, Virginia was named after President Buchanan, but the article concerning that county says that the county was named after John Buchanan, a surveyor. Moreover, the Virginia county is pronounced Buck-hannon County, which seems unlikely if it was named after the president.


William H. Wright, Jr. 148.170.241.1 (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read that Andrew Jackson referred to him as Buck-hannon but that was in jest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.228.230 (talk) 18:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was James Buchanan HOMO-SEXUAL???

I recently found information from a book that James Buchanan had lived with Rufus King for sixteen years. At least two other references said that Buchanan had an INTIMATE relationship with King. Does this mean Buchanan is our first HOMO-SEXUAL president??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aruda556 (talkcontribs) 23:31, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One book as a reference is a bit obscure. Add to that the fact that in that age, staff lived in the same building/house frequently AND intimate is a relative term, especially as I've been intimate with a few men, but never in a sexual manner, but sharing information that I couldn't share with my wife due to my duties, the connotation is specious at best. You are applying a 21st century social filter to 19th century terminology. Hazardous at best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.16.223 (talk) 05:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is more than one source. It is factual and deserves a mention.99.169.66.28 (talk) 03:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kansas

How could president Buchannan have had trouble with Kansas in 1854 if his presidency didn't start until 1857? Something's scrambled there, and with Buchannan in England for most of Pierce's presidency, it's probably the date. -- Jeffryfisher (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

good point. I fixed it. Rjensen (talk) 20:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are stamp images sufficiently significant to be included

This issue has been the subject of lengthy discussion at Lincoln. The consensus has been reached there that stamps are not of sufficient significance and do not inform the reader to the degree appropriate for inclusion. Space limitations need to be considered here as well. I have deleted the image inserted here, and a link to the stamps is provided. User Gwillhickers disagrees. Please comment. Carmarg4 (talk) 21:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree. Were space limitations NOT an issue, I'd suggest inclusion, PERHAPS. But, they are NOT necessary to inform one of the president or even the person in question AND space IS important. That said, thanks for providing the link. I may avail myself of it, time permitting, just to add further trivial to my mind in my spare time. Yes, I was serious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.16.223 (talk) 06:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the link serves the purpose. Carmarg4 (talk) 12:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the coin image and replaced it with a link to the coin for the same reasons stated above. Carmarg4 (talk) 13:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A better early life section image

I propose the current image of his ancestral home in Belfast be replace by this image of his own birthplace. I think it is more "significant" per WP image guidelines. Thoughts? Carmarg4 (talk) 15:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buchanan's Birthplace State Park.jpg|thumb|left|Stone pyramid marking the site of Buchanan's birth at Cove Gap, PA Carmarg4 (talk) 15:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image overcrowding

I have removed the following image due to overcrowding. File:Buchananmural.jpg|thumb|left|150px|Buchanan's Ulster heritage is celebrated in a mural on Belfast's Shankill Road. Hoppyh (talk) 12:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the following image due to overcrowding. Image:James Buchanan in 1860 - Meade Brothers.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Buchanan as photographed by Charles and Henry Meade in 1860. Hoppyh (talk) 12:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The following image was removed due to overcrowding. File:eagle.JPG|thumb|Editorial cartoon in Republican newspapers, 1861. Hoppyh (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following to eliminate overcrowding.File:Hand-colored lithograph of James Buchanan.jpg|thumb|left|Hand-colored lithography|lithograph of Buchanan by Nathaniel Currier. Hoppyh (talk) 19:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are the LGBT project and portal really necessary here?

There's no definitive proof that President Buchanan really was a homosexual. Even the source in the article states that the claim is simply based on speculation. There are plenty of actors, musicians, and other modern celebrities rumored to be homosexuals as well and the project isn't included on their pages. Including the project on this page seems to me like including President Harding in WikiProject African diaspora. RG (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]