Talk:Ted Cruz

Cuban-American?

Is Cruz a "Cuban-American"? How so? He was born in Canada to a Cuban father and an American mother. Cuban-American's definition is "are Americans who trace their national origin to Cuba". How can Cruz's "National origin" be Cuban? Cwobeel (talk) 05:08, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Issues of race and ethnicity are as much about self identification as they are of actual ancestry. Cruz's father was Cuban so this makes him a Cuban-American. This is the same logic by which Barack Obama, born to an African father and an American mother of English descent, is an African American. --Allen3 ^talk 10:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Cruz self-identifies as an "American" period. Wikipedia uses the person's self-identification period. So there you have the answer. It is not the job of editors to decide what Cruz will call himself. If this was true then there would a ton of editors looking to identify Obama, since he is dual citizen of the U.S. and Kenya, as a Kenyan-American. That description would be wrong and it is wrong to force a description on Cruz based upon Cwobeel wants it to be. Do you have a reliable source for your proposed description Cwobeel? Since you haven't provided one then I assume you don't. This discussion should be about how to improve the article not what one editor wants the article to say, e.g., POV-pushing. That is not the standard. The two standards for discussion here is: (1) self-identification and (2) improvement of the article. Let's stick with those standards.--NK (talk) 18:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

1st, Obama does not have dual citizenship. Second, I am not trying to push a POV, just trying to understand if Cruz is a Cuban-American or not. If we use the self identification path, we need a source in which Cruz identifies himself as Cuban-American. Cwobeel (talk)

Of course, Obama had dual citizenship. His father was a citizen of Kenya, which makes him eligible for citizenship under Kenya's constitution. Obama was born in Hawaii therefore he is also a U.S. citizen. Also, Obama can claim U.S. citizenship through his mother, who was also a U.S. citizen. However, Obama lost his Kenya citizenship at 23, but no one talks about the fact that he was a dual citizen until he was 23. You have edited the article to call attention to Cruz's status that is POV pushing.--NK (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, your original edit was ludicrous you basically stated that "as of so and so date, Cruz remained a Canadian" etc. Is the new rule now that we go around and say, "Today is so and so and John McCain is still a U.S. citizen". Or today is so and so day and Obama remains a U.s. citizen, he has not reverted back to Kenyan citizenship." That would be POV-pushing that is exactly how you edited his article. It was not an improvement. It was not notable. It was pure POV pushing.--NK (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

@NazariyKaminski: That is what the source says, sorry if you don't like it. Also, find a source i9n which Cruz describes himself as Cuban American". Cwobeel (talk) 22:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

it does not matter what the source says. The information is non-notable. If he denounces his Canadian citizenship then there is something notable. What you are adding is not notable. Also, you have the burden to find the source for the "Cuban american" thing. You brought it up.--NK (talk) 22:43, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Of course is notable. He is a US Senator and potential Presidential candidate. Here is the source: Ted Cruz still citizen of U.S. and Canada [1]] Cwobeel (talk) 22:47, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

That source [2] is (a) not an WP:RS, and (b) is not a source in which Cruz self-identifies as Cuban American. Read the thread above. Cwobeel (talk) 22:51, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

The Austin American-Statesman is a reliable source and your statement that "he still is canadian" is not notable.--NK (talk) 22:54, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I have requested assistance at the BLP noticeboard Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Ted_Cruz Cwobeel (talk) 22:59, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

The official biography of Cruz at senate.gov neither defines him as "Latino" or as "Cuban-American" [3] . So my question is: can we still describe Cruz as Latino and Cuban-American, given that his Father was Cuban? His mother is American from Italian and Irish ancestry. Cwobeel (talk) 23:06, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

My point is that your question is a ridiculous question. It is not up to Cwobeel to decide what to call Cruz. Obama's mother was also white, just like Cruz, but his article in Wikipedia refers to him, in the first line of the article, as "African-Amereican". So, if we use the Cwobeel standard going forward the editors of Wikipedia cannot call Obama African-American because Obama's mother was white. You are making a ludicrous point and the article should stay just how it is "Cuban American".--NK (talk) 23:19, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

If you want to discuss the ancestry of the President of the United States, do it at Barack Obama. Here we are discussing the ancestry of the freshman senator from Texas. See Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Ted_Cruz where experienced BLP editors are commenting on this issue. Cwobeel (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

You are piling it on, uh? In any case, it seems that your effort will be futile. Cwobeel (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I am discussing Ted Cruz. There has been a long, long discussion about the phrase "African American" as it applies to Obama and it was decided, correctly of course, that "African American" would apply. The same discussion applies here. No, there will be consistency between articles in Wikipedia on this issue. You are the only editor who is making the ludicrous argument that Ted Cruz is not Cuban American. You have to justify it and you will not justify it by choosing to ignore the logical discussion that took place over at Obama's article. If are arguing that "Cuban American" should be removed then you need to explain why Obama is correctly called an "African American" when his mother is white, but Cruz cannot be called "Cuban American" when his mother is white. You need to answer this question right, right now on this Cruz talk page. Just choosing to ignore this valid, relevant, on-point inconsistency will not work. You need to explain instead of ignore and stonewall. You need to explain it.--NK (talk) 23:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, "futile" what are you, 12 years old?--NK (talk) 23:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

No, I am 64. Futile: "incapable of producing any useful result; pointless" Cwobeel (talk) 00:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

My understanding is that ancestry in BLPs are based in self-identification. So far I found one source that self-describes Cruz as "Hispanic", but I have not found any sources in which he self-describes as "Latino" or "Cuban-American". In BLPs the burden is on the person wanting to add content that may be contentious, so the burden is on you to find sources in which Cruz self-describes as "Latino" and "Cuban-American" if you want to keep that in the ariticle. But until then, the only denomination we can use is "Hispanic". Cwobeel (talk) 00:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Wrong. You are making up rules. Cruz identifies as "Cuban American" in all of his campaign literature and he uses his father as one of his biggest speakers on the campaign stump. There are plenty of reliable sources that support the phrase. The burden is on you to change the consensus. You have not done that. Also, you have never responded to the discussion on the Obama article talk page. You will have to respond to that discussion. You will not ignore it, as long as you think you are going remove the phrase "Cuban American". The information will not be changed based upon the comments you have made so far. You have not met your burden of proof to overcome the long, long term consensus on the wording used in the article.--NK (talk) 02:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Listen, NK, I am not interested in the Obama biography. I am interested in this one and other potential presidential contenders. If there are plenty of sources in which Cruz self-describes himself as "Cuban-American" or "Latino", I will be the first to add that text, but I have researched in-depth and could not find even one mention. The burden is on you as this is a WP:BLP, which reads: "The burden of evidence for any edit rests with the person who adds or restores material." Cwobeel (talk) 04:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Listen, Cwobeel, I know you want to have your way. I know you want to ignore the fact that Obama's mother is white. I know you want to ignore the fact that there are hundreds of reliable sources that call Cruz "Cuban American". I know you want to ignore the fact that Cruz's father was born in Cuba. I know you want to ignore the fact that on the campaign trail and in interviews Cruz constantly talks about his father's escape from Cuba. I know you want to ignore the fact that his father goes on the campaign trail with him and gives long speeches on his personal flight from Cuba. I know you want to remove all references in the article to Cruz's Latino and Cuban heritage. I know that you want to ignore all of these facts because you want to push your POV. I am aware of all of these things and because I am aware of all of these things I am not going to go along with your POV-pushing agenda. How do I know that you are POV-pushing? Because you readily admit that Cruz's father comes from Cuba, but you don't give a reason why if Cruz's father is clearly "Cuba American" then how can it be that Cruz himself isn't "Cuban American". Why haven't you explained away that fact? There are hundreds of reliable sources that back up my position. You have not provided even one reliable source that says Cruz is not a "Cuban American". I am going to go with reliable sources over your POV-pushing any day.--NK (talk) 11:08, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

The discussion is taking place at the BLP Noticeboard, where non-involved editors with experience in BLPs are weighing in. You may want to join the conversation there. BTW, I have no problems whatsoever in keeping the denomination "Hispanic" as that is the way Cruz self-describes in his official biography. Now, if you could please WP:AGF, that would be really nice. I have only one interest: accuracy. Cwobeel (talk) 14:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

He counts himself as a Cuban, at the US-Cuban democracy PAC in the first few minutes of this video http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ted+cruz+cuban&FORM=HDRSC3#view=detail&mid=AEE900E9704C58924164AEE900E9704C58924164 Gaijin42 (talk) 15:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

It should be researched whether Cruz's father's ancestry is Latino or not. Cruz appears to come from the European Spanish class and not latino at all. If this is the case it is wrong to call him a latino. § — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejshalis (talk • contribs) 02:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

1) You are factually incorrect. Latino definitely does cover the descendants of European white people from spain/portugal.

2) If it didn't it would be the Indians that would be excluded, since Latin is a reference to the romance languages of the conquerors

3) And even if we got past that "research" by us is specifically prohibited by WP:OR - we follow the WP:RS and they say he is Latino.

Gaijin42 (talk) 02:57, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Canada as place of birth

I am confused about why stating that he was born in Canada is such a big deal. He was born there and listed accordingly. List of foreign-born United States politicians. Cwobeel (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The article does state that he was born in canada. Multiple times, in multiple places. But he has explicitly renounced his Canadian citizenship, and has no significant Canadian identity, so it is WP:UNDUE to emphasize it past his place of birth. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Undue? Other foreign-born Congressmen have their country of birth clearly stated in their bios. Here are a few examples:

• Former US rep for Kentuky’s 4th district: ‘’Geoff Davis was born in Montreal, Canada to American parents (one of few House members to be born in Quebec).’’
• Junior United States Senator from Hawaii: ‘’Mazie Hirono was born on November 3, 1947, in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. ‘’
• Member of the House of Representatives: ‘’Ron Barber was born in Wakefield, West Riding of Yorkshire, England, shortly after World War II.
• US rep. for Colorado 1st district: ‘’A fourth-generation Coloradan, Diana Louise DeGette was born in Tachikawa, Japan’’

Why not in this bio as well? Cwobeel (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

You don't need to be confused because it is not a big deal that he was born in Canada. Your statement makes no sense. The article says over and over again that he was born in Canada. You just want to add it in one more time which, of course, is overkill. It is unnecessary. It is POV-pushing. The article discussed in great detail why he can be President even though he was born in Canada, etc. There is unnecessary for a fourth mention of his Canadian birth--just drop the POV pushing.--NK (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Relax, man. There is only one place in which his place of birth is mentioned, at the bottom of the article in the section "Speculation on a possible run for higher office". This is a biography for Pete's sake, and not mentioning the country of birth in the "early life" section (as if this was a big deal) is incomprehensible. Cwobeel (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Uh, it is in this bio? "Cruz was born on December 22, 1970[2][5] in Calgary, Alberta, Canada[2][14] where his parents, Eleanor Elizabeth Wilson Darragh[14][15][16][17][18][19] and Rafael Bienvenido Cruz,[17][18] were working in the oil business.[20][21] " Gaijin42 (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I added that, but Mr or Ms NK reverted it. Diff: [4]. If it stays then we are done. Cwobeel (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Once again, it is whitewashing. You attempted to remove all references in the article to the fact that he is a Cuban American. Now you make up the story that having it mentioned in the article that Cruz was born in Canada is "a big deal" and that his Canadian birth was not mentioned in the bio, which factually is not true. It is bad enough that you are, unsuccessfully, POV pushing but you are also just flat out getting the facts wrong compounds the whitewash. The article already stated that "Since Cruz was born in Canada, commentators for the Austin American-Statesman" long before you came along. In the intro info box there was a mention of Canada and of course the section that discusses his eligibility for the Presidency referred to the Canadian birth several times. There is no reason to POV push.--NK (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

No, I am not, and you should stop the lack of good faith, it is becoming tedious and insufferable. Now that we have resolved this at WP:BLP/N do we need 4 sources for the same content? As for the inclusion on Canad, after the name of City and State, that is standard in Wikipedia.Cwobeel (talk) 00:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• There is one mention of Canada on the “Early life” section (which you deleted and I reverted back)
• There is another mention in the “Speculation on a possible run for higher office”
• There is no mention of Canada in the info box

Get you facts straight before you trample with your own words. Cwobeel (talk) 00:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Canada in Infobox

Calgary, Alberta is specified in the info box, which as good as says Canada I think. I also think it would be perfectly reasonable to note TC's birthplace early in the lead, and the fact that it's mentioned in the body of the article would appear to support inclusion there. Although it's not universal practice, it's fairly commonplace. While I think Gaijin's policy point is interesting, I don't think a passing mention in the lead is UNDUE. It would simply be informative. If there are genuine concerns about UNDUE, might they be assuaged by reducing the number of mentions in the body of the article? (Sorry I can't be arsed to count them, but Gaijin's "multiple times" in "multiple places" suggest there are quite a few, and I probably don't have enough fingers.) Writegeist (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2014 (UTC) (adding) OK there are two mentions of Canadian birth and one of Canadian citizenship. (The remaining mentions are all in the references section.) Seems there's plenty of leeway for a birthplace mention in the lead? Writegeist (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Calgary, Alberta, without Canada is not encyclopedic. Think of the reader: How many readers will know in which country Calgary is? Look at other congressman bios, for example: US rep. for Colorado 1st district: A fourth-generation Coloradan, Diana Louise DeGette was born in Tachikawa, Japan. Will you just put Tachikawa, without Japan? Of course not, right? But for a Japanese reader Tachikawa is obviously in Japan. And for the same Japanese reader, Calgary, Alberta, can be anywhere unless is it clearly indicated that is in Canada. Makes sense? Cwobeel (talk) 03:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Writegeist (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Added to infobox as per other biographies of foreign-born members of Congress (see above thread for some examples of such bios). Cwobeel (talk) 03:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Sme more examples:

• U.S. Representative for Connecticut's 4th congressional district - “Jim Himes was born July 5, 1966 in Lima, Peru”
• U.S. Representative for Maryland's 8th congressional district - “Chris Van Hollen was born in Karachi, Pakistan”
• U.S. Representative for New Jersey's 8th congressional district - “Albio Sires was born January 26, 1951 in Bejucal, Cuba.”
• Junior United States Senator from Colorado “Michael Farrand Bennet, November 28, 1964 ,New Delhi, India”

Cwobeel (talk) 03:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Although my personal gut feeling leans with cwobeel on this issue (that we should Specify Canada in the infobox), it appears that is not the standard for Canadian topics. I clicked on about 10 random people from List_of_people_from_Calgary and ALL of them that had an infobox that had a birth in Canada just listed City, Province. The same thing for how their birth las put in prose in their bio section. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Canada-related_articles#Places does not have explicit guidance on this, but does seem to lean towards City, Province as the preferred usage. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Sean Patrick Maloney, former U.S. Representative for New York's 18th congressional district, has Canada in his infobox: July 30, 1966 (age 47) Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. Granted, Shebrooke is not as known as Calgary for some of us, but for most non-American readers, Calgary can be anywhere unless the country is explicitly stated. Cwobeel (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Oppose as requiring consensus at this point -- very few politicians and very few people of any group have a specific "place of birth" given in an infobox at all. Please seek consensus before making this bold edit again. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Are you serious? Most infoboxes, if not all include place of birth, including country of birth. For most American-born BLPs that is sometimes omitted (but not all, check John_Quincy_Adams and Mitt Romney infobox). Infoboxes of non-US born BLPs have the country of birth. Why should Cruz get a different treatment?Cwobeel (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

@Collect:, please respect the consensus and don't delete the place of birth from the infobox that has been there for a very long time. Cwobeel (talk) 15:26, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes -- if one looks, one finds it is not usual for "place of birth" to be in BLPs. As such, it requires consensus for inclusion - thus my procedural request that you obtain a consensus for any cite of his place of birth in the infobox. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

You will need to look really hard.... Check any of the lists of foreign-born politicians and you will be hard pressed to find one without their country of birth in their infobox. Here is a starting point for you: List of foreign-born United States politicians Cwobeel (talk) 15:34, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

You are using WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS as your argument. All I ask is that you actually seek WP:CONSENSUS for including place of birth in the infobox -- which is a reasonable request. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Please follow your argument. It was you who said "it is not usual for "place of birth" to be in BLPs" in your previous comment. Cwobeel (talk)

FYI, I have requested uninvolved editors' assistance at Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#Country of birth in Infoboxes Cwobeel (talk) 15:38, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I can't think of any reason we wouldn't include the country along with Calgary, Alberta. Yes, I know some partisans want to make hey of where he was born. Such is life. He was born in Canada. Candleabracadabra (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Candleabracadabra. Folks: see also comment at WP:MOS talk page: [5] - @Collect, indeed what I am trying to do is to find consensus, and as there is disagreement, asking uninvolved editors is part of WP:DR, see Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution#Receive_outside_help_for_content_disputes. Cwobeel (talk) 16:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

After asking foir third-party advice, this is very obvious: Canada should be listed in the infobox. If there is no consensus by end of day, I will file a request at WP:DR/N, to assist us in the process of resolving this content dispute. Cwobeel (talk) 17:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

In my experience, biographies (including BLPs) nearly always list the country of birth in the infobox. It is basic biographical information that is of interest to most readers. Jogurney (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Some background: AFAICT 'Canada' was added to TC's infobox in September 2011[[6] and had a mostly stable place there until on 22 August 2013 User:BingNorton—apparently an experienced editor [7] although the BingNorton account was two months old—removed it, saying Canada references are redundant as "every one knows Calgary, Alberta is in Canada." [8]. A couple of weeks after BingNorton's last edit (last-ever, in fact, as the username then suddenly disappeared from the 'pedia), User:NazariyKaminski arrived to delete 'Canada' from the article's Early life section, [9] (with an edsum giving no reason), thus reducing the total number of times that that version of the article mentioned TC being born in Canada to, um, one—in the "Speculation on future" section.

To include or not to include? I accept N-HH's word on inclusion of the country in the infoboxes for the list of foreign-born US politicians. [10] However there are many WP bios whose infoboxes specify city and state but not country. And many that include it. One can cherry-pick either way. E.g. all the following infoboxes include Canada:

• Stephen Harper, Canadian Prime Minister, born Toronto, Ontario, Canada [11]

• Norman Kim Kwong, 16th Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [12]

• Stan Stephens, 20th Governor of Montana, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [13]

• James Gosling, computer scientist, inventor of Java programming language, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [14]

• Theo de Raadt, software engineer who founded OpenBSD and OpenSSH projects, residence Calgary, Alberta, Canada [15]

• Delighfully named war hero Ian Willoughby Bazalgette, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [16]

• Tibetan lama Lobsang Rampa, died Calgary, Alberta, Canada [17]

• George Stanley, designer of the Canadian flag, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [18]

• Film director David Winnng, born Calgary, Canada [19]

• Cheech and Chong's Tommy Chong, born Edmonton, Alberta, Canada [20]

• NFL player Nate Burleson, Cleveland Browns wider receiver, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [21]

• Novelist Nancy Huston, born Calgary, Canada [22]

• Actor/singer Cory Monteith, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [23]

• Heather Marks, supermodel, born Calgary, Alberta, Canada [24]

Is there any sound reason in policy to exclude Canada from Cruz's infobox? As N-HH says, this is a global encyclopedia. Assumptions that all readers would already know Calgary is in Canada are, well, just assumptions. And rather imperious, First-Worldy ones at that. Writegeist (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the sleuthing, in particular about the fact that "Canada" was in the infobox for years before it was deleted for no apparent reason and without consensus, and the comments from third-party editors, I think this is becoming a no-brainer. Cwobeel (talk) 19:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Amazingly enough - being in an article "for years" is not found in any Wikipedia policy as far as need for consensus is concerned. And I can list hundreds of BLPs which do not include place of birth in an infobox (infoboxes do not generally contain everything about a topic, as a rule). All I ask is that you gain a consensus at this point -- which is not really too much of a problem, I trust. Collect (talk) 19:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd argue that you are not considering the situation when you discuss consensus. By some reason, you believe that there should be consensus for adding something to an article, but you ought to consider that the consensus can be also framed for deleting something, in particular something as non-controversial, fact-based, such as the country of birth of a person. I'd argue that the burden is on you to provide a rationale for excluding that and for finding consensus for exclusion. Otherwise you are just seem to be stonewalling for no reason. Cwobeel (talk) 19:31, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I rather agree with much of what Cwobeel says, and sympathize with the frustration. In addition, one may or may not agree with Christopher Hitchens's dictum that "there is something idiotic about those who believe that consensus (to give the hydra-headed beast just one of its names) is the highest good," and we may prefer common sense to prevail (as consensus is often far from common-sensical). But one of the problems with Wikipedia is that common sense is rather ucommon here. So in the absence of guidance from policy or guideline, when we hear squeals of "Consensus!" there is little alternative but to go looking for it—even when it's to mention the name of the country where someone was, incontrovertibly, born; and even when it's to mention that country of birth in the part of an infobox that tells readers where the person was, er, born. However, as Collect says, I don't see it being much of a problem here. (Famous last words . . .) If it's any consolation to you, it sometimes happens that a stone wall falls on its constructor. Writegeist (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• support Saying Calgary, Alberta, Canada in infobox, and in prose where birthplace is listed. oppose describing him as Canadian, Canadian-American etc. (per MOS:IDENTITY as he is not regularly described that way, and also does not self identify that way) possibly support a brief one liner saying he had Canadian citizenship, but has renounced it. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• support I would say to Collect that this is not a fight worth having. Included, or not, it does not really matter. I disagree that it is "needed" because frankly, anyone that doesn't know that Calgary is in Canada could simply click on the wiki-link and see quite quickly that it is in Canada. However, it does appear to be the common way of addressing place of birth in the infobox. Arzel (talk) 20:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• support reverting to the perfectly reasonable Calgary, Alberta, Canada in infobox. I haven't seen a single persuasive case made for exclusion. Writegeist (talk) 20:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• note This is not a "fight" on my part -- there has been edit war a few times now about this material, and WP:CONSENSUS pretty much requires this step. The facts are not disputed, but policy insists we go through this exercise, otherwise the edit war will repeat at some point. Cheers. Collect (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Canada in Early Life section

@NazariyKaminski: To check the article history I sampled 24 and 25 September 2013. I found you repeatedly edit-warring the word 'Canada' out of both the infobox and the Early Life section in a duel with an IP (diffs on request). I don't know how far the edit-war extended beyond those dates; I didn't look. Now it appears you may intend the same modus operandi once again for the Early Life section [25] [26]. (Excuse me if I am mistaken, but given the history you might agree it's an understandable mistake.) You have been asked to discuss this content on the talk page. Please do so this time. Thanks! Writegeist (talk) 04:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

3RR warnings are supposed to go on the UT pages for those involved in excess reverting and be addressed to both parties. Else this fillip seems to verge on a personal attack, alas. Using this page for the purpose to which you appear to use it is improper. Cheers. Collect (talk) 12:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm grateful for this reminder. I should have known better, alas, particularly as the first clause in the first sentence of this post in a conversation about Sentor Cruz had already and very recently reminded me about the importance of not writing anything that might appear to be "improper" or to "verge on a personal attack." My apologies to NazariyKaminski for my error. And I see no plausible reason for excluding the word 'Canada'. Writegeist (talk) 17:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Let's focus on the content. Should the birthplace given in the Early life section include "Canada" as well as the city and Alberta? I think it should. Candleabracadabra (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Of course. This is an encyclopedia and date of birth, city of birth, country of birth are basics. If this was the bio of a singer, will we be having this conversation? Of course not. Just because this person is an American politician we should not make "special accommodations" to hide his country of birth. This is a no brainer. It is an issue because some editors here think that having Canada in this bio will diminish Cruz status as a presidential candidate (which by the way, it does not as he is a natural born American per the law). Calling a spade a spade here. Cwobeel (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

On the matter of dual citizenship, swearing allegiance to one country is normally sufficient to blunt any claims of citizenship in another. Cruz has taken the oath of office both in Texas and in the U.S. Senate. This would also apply to Obama in any claims of citizenship in either Kenya or the British Empire. Cptmrmcmillan (talk) 07:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Currently, Cruz has dual citizenship (US and Canadian), as Canada requires by law for citizens to formally apply for rescinding their Canadian citizenship. Cruz has retained counsel last year to get that process done. Cwobeel (talk) 16:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

The source that claims he "became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2005.[31]" does not mention that. That sentence should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.116.228 (talk) 02:25, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Source corrected.TMCk (talk) 14:30, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

In any case, the formal renunciation of Canadian citizenship has been done, and acknowledged by the Canadian government. He is no longer a Canadian citizen. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Ted Cruz is NOT a Tea Party Star!

Just because he "openly identifies with the Tea Party movement" does not mean that the Tea Party identifies with him! ...Andrea Greff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.47.246 (talk) 16:14, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Election

Second phrase: He was elected in 2012, not 2013. He took office in 2013, but the election was in November 2012.--78.52.212.24 (talk) 09:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh

The mother's maiden name is Darragh. For some reason she is listed as Eleanor Elizabeth Wilson Darragh. Wilson is her married name. It is not appropriate to place her maiden name after her married name. It should read Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson. Also there are 6 references following the full name and not one article references the fact that Wilson is her married name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.12.147 (talk) 06:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Senator's personal health-care coverage

It seems to me relevant how the senator has his personal health insurance provided -- by Goldman Sachs via his wife's employment, not through the Federal system -- given his strong stance on the public policy of health care. The fact of his coverage source was called "trivial" and deleted from this article here. Any other opinions? Swliv (talk) 13:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2014

|profession=Lawyer 110.148.158.194 (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)