Talk:United States

Error in info box

The sum of the religions is over 99% essentially covering the population 100%, implying there are no atheists or negligible irreligion. A flat falsehood rather than a misrepresentation. Probably best source on this will be Pew Religion. Suggest you consult usage in similar countries, i.e. Canada, UK, and Australia. Implying that religion applied to the entire population would be reasonable in the set of countries like Malta, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc. but not this set. Lycurgus (talk) 04:11, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Also grossly contradicts the text in the body of the article. Lycurgus (talk) 04:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I think you misread a few things? First of all, the source of the religion in the infobox is Pew. Secondly, the second entry - 22.8% - is "irreligious". And a quick glance shows the same numbers used in the body. So I'm not sure what you're seeing here that needs to be fixed? --Golbez (talk) 04:36, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

ty~, my bad, somehow I looked at that and assumed it was something else, a denomination. Shouldn't have been so ready to see the negative thing. It's a natural mistake given the current order, one I wouldn't have made if irreligion was at the bottom, or otherwise distinguished from a list of religions. 98.4.124.117 (talk) 04:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2017

182.188.27.18 (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Current text

Suggested text

The United States of America /əˈmɛrɪkə/ (USA), commonly known as the United States (U.S.) or America, is a constitutional federal republic composed of 50 states, a federal district, five major self-governing territories, and various possessions. Forty-eight of the fifty states and the federal district are contiguous and located in North America between Canada and Mexico. The state of Alaska is in the ...

The United States of America, commonly referred to as the United States, America, and sometimes the States, is a federal republic consisting of 50 states and a federal district. The 48 contiguous states and Washington, D.C. are in central North America between Canada and Mexico. The state of Alaska is located in the ...

Declined, no reasoning given for request. --Golbez (talk) 17:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

First sentence

I removed the term "Constitutional" from the first sentence. The first sentence has a consensus that went through dispute resolution and should only be altered with another strong consensus. While consensus can change, the last discussion that brought up the word usage next to "Federal Republic" seems to indicate there is no need to add the word. "Federal Republic" is sourced.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:18, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Additional discussion;[1] and here [2] and here [3] and here [4].--Mark Miller (talk) 02:05, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Just double checking but it seems that the change was made on February 9th with no explanation by user XXGfHXx.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

the food section should begin as follows:

Please add words almost exactly as follows to the start of the Food section:

“ The United States has a strikingly different food culture from other Western countries, with which it shares basic food types, with the difference focusing on quantity. The average American eats more than 3,000 Calories per day, and typical food servings are double that of other countries. The country has introduced sugar-based beverages (Coca Cola) and carbohydrate-rich fast food (McDonalds), and as a result of this and other cultural differences, the country faces a the largest epedemic of obesity (40%) among all developed countries. As direct result of the food culture, morbidity from preventable disease is by far the highest among all developed countries, and although the country is the richest in the world, as a direct result of preventable eating-related health outcomes (preventable leading causes of death include Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases), Chronic lower respiratory diseases, Diabetes, Heart Disease), its life expectancy is 31st in the world, at only 69 years (both sexes life expectancy, HALE), a full 5% - or 4 years - lower than comparable countries without this epidemic. Americans are often caricatured as "fat" and masses of clinically obese people are a surprising first sight for all international travelers arriving in any American city. There is a cultural movement called Fat Acceptance having its source in the United States and with the purpose of normalizing and promoting these eating habits. The reasons why American cuisine has moved so markedly in this direction are not clear but began in earnest only in the second half of the twentieth century. ”

As it is, you fail to describe or summarize food in the United States. You simply don't give basic information. it would be like writing about the Catholic faith without mentioning the Vatican. you're omitting the fundamental information everyone knows. For balance you could mention the FDA and nutritional labels (which are very positive.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:AB88:2481:FC80:BD9F:CBC9:CDF4:C41C (talk) 01:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

You're relating things that have more to do with nutrition and health, than with foodstuffs consumed, which is what the Food section currently relates, IIRC (I haven't pulled up the article). You haven't given any sources, and your wording seems definitely non-neutral POV ("masses of clinically obese people are a surprising first sight"). Dhtwiki (talk) 12:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, this screed is very anti-FA (protip: that's not what Fat Acceptance is about), and ... yeah, there's absolutely no going here. --Golbez (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

U.S. average life expectancy is 79, not 69. See WHO, the UN, etc. You mustn't confuse US life expectancy with that of Russia, as the former is first-world and the latter is third. US life expectancy is also higher than in most of eastern Europe, and not that much below Denmark's. The rest of the "quote" is the kind of nutritional activism (which I do sympathize with) that should be toned down for an encyclopedia. One can say the same thing, more soberly, backed up with sources, and in fewer words. Mason.Jones (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Both the Food and Health sections in the article give information on obesity, plus links to an article or two, I think. Obesity in the United States, which is probably one that is linked to from the article, shows how the level of detail asked for above is treated. Dhtwiki (talk) 11:44, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I am the OP who started this section. The person who said that my suggestion places too much emphasis on health effects for the food section is correct! You are right that obesity isn't literally "food". It is probably not appropriate for the "food" section. At the same time, if you talk with ANYONE who is not from the United States (from ANY country) and ask "how was the food", the first words out of their mouth will be something like, "oh my God there is so MUCH of it - the portions are absolutely massive." Basically, an objective, neutral description of American food MUST begin and have as its major component the fact that there is so much of it and the food culture's effect on the population. Other countries really don't come close in their food culture. To the people who objected to my specific health analysis, I think you are correct that the "food" section should be basically cultural and not basically be about health or nutrition. So somehow you should reword the section to be very encyclopedic but get across the main defining characteristic of food in the United States: its overabundance and overconsumption. This is also pretty new historically speaking (it wasn't at all true in 1920, say), and it's not clear to me when this happened. There should at east be some kind of indication of this. It is not a good article section if you find out more by going there (to America) than you do by reading its encyclopedia article, because the encyclopedia article leaves out the most important and salient aspect! That means it is not neutral. Please improve it! Thank you. 2A02:AB88:2481:FC80:50C4:ED5D:F7B1:3D6F (talk) 12:41, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Governmental system descriptors

We should probably use a more accurate term that includes the oligarchical nature of the government. Something like "illiberal democracy" or "inverted totalitarian regime" would probably be more accurate, but those are political philosophies rather than actual systems of government. Perhaps "oligarchical representative democracy?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:8065:3D00:6C38:C9E9:BE9F:F5C5 (talk) 12:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

We could just call them nazis. Would that work? --Golbez (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

We would only say that if it were a formal oligarchy. See for example Upper Canada, where the info-box has "oligarchy" as in the government field. All cabinet officers, judges, civil servants and members of the upper house were appointed on the recommendation of a local elite. TFD (talk) 22:39, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Nothing about firearms under Culture?

I feel like the Culture section should make mention of firearms.174.54.203.225 (talk) 04:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)