Talk:Harry S. Truman/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Millions, not hundreds of thousands

A number of museums, including the World War II Museum in New Orleans, LA, along with articles such as this one in Forbes, accurately report both Japanese and U.S. estimates of casualties (deaths) of the planned invasion of the Japanese mainland as ranging between 2.5 million and 7 million. Thus, the the hundreds of thousands of American and Japanese lives that would inevitably be lost" is misleading by an order of magnitude. I have therefore changed the text in the first section to reflect actual period estimates.Clepsydrae (talk) 22:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:11, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:52, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Use of {{sfn}} in this article

G'day all, just wanted to mention that recent changes to the {{sfn}} template affect the way it displays in some instances where it is used with a full date, per fn 223, 230 and 256 in this article. As it is used in that way in this article, and there might be more than one editor of this article that has used the template in this way, I thought I'd mention here that the discussion is ongoing at Template talk:Sfn#Query re: loose ampersand using sfn and harvid. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:16, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:21, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harry S. Truman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:42, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

What's with the pop-up text on a bunch of pictures?

They have strangely worded captions - such as "Three men in suits with several men in the background" Instead of Noting that it is Josef Stalin, Winston Churchill, and Truman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:200:7E01:C016:2357:E29:B9C2 (talk) 21:38, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Not up to Featured Article standards

Though impressive, I can see that this article was promoted in 2007. Some sections are incomplete or non-existent (e. g. Administration and cabinet) and the civil rights section is definitely missing some important info. -Indy beetle (talk) 02:26, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it might be better to just remove the admin and cabinet section and the int'l trips section if they're only going to consist of a link. The civil rights section doesn't look too bad but should probably at least give some context about the McCarran Act. Orser67 (talk) 09:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

I have just completed a major edit of the lede in an attempt to bring it back in line with FA criteria. @Rjensen: I would be grateful if you could check behind me. Hoppyh (talk) 20:27, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

OK I will do that..you're doing a great job so far! Just today I added a susbsection on Spain, and made some small edits in the lede. Rjensen (talk) 21:42, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

The part on the 1946 railway strike needs work. We are told initially that there was "a rail strike in May". But then the next paragraph says "a national rail strike threatened in May 1946": the chronology is off. Also instead of contemporary newsreel reports, the article should be using high-quality modern secondary sources. DrKay (talk) 13:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Seeing as Harry had no middle name

the S in his name is not an abbreviation. Could an admin remove the period? Just nitpickin' soibangla (talk) 21:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Read the FAQ above. Ian Dalziel (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2019

This is the first time i've done a edit request so i don't know if i'm doing this right but bear with me, I have discovered a good image that could be used for the lead infobox image. I saw that the infobox image was changed to the current painting because the previous image was black and white, the reason I think the proposed picture is good is because it's high quality, in color (like Franklin Roosevelt's own image).

78.108.56.35 (talk) 13:59, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

The image is already in use on the Spanish, Romanian, German and Dutch Wikipedia. I just feel that someone like Harry Truman really deserves a better photograph. 78.108.56.35 (talk) 13:44, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 Done MrClog (talk) 21:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hair color

What was Harry S. Truman's hair color? In the picture File:Lyndon Johnson signing Medicare bill, with Harry Truman, July 30, 1965.jpg he looks a little blond. In her book "Harry Truman", his daughter says that Truman believed he was blond when he was a child. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Evaluation of Nuclear Attack

@Rjensen: Hey, we seem to have a content dispute over the presentation of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki debate in the introduction. Let's keep this civil and discuss here. I would like to especially emphazise the fact that we should not only cover the evaluation in the United States but take into account international sources. Kind regards, wikitigresito (talk) 01:43, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

there a small amount of hostile comment in 1945, worldwide. Rjensen (talk) 13:43, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
True, I but our dispute is more about the ongoing debate, isn't it? The sources which I added are not about the comments in 1945. wikitigresito (talk) 21:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
the article at FPRI "Ending the Pacific War: Harry Truman and the Decision To Drop the Bomb:" by Richard B. Frank (2009) seems to show that new evidence leaves the critics high and dry. Frank says there is ZERO evidence of a possible Japanese surrender. Frank says: . No Japanese government had surrendered to a foreign power in the 2,600-year history of Japan. No Japanese military unit had surrendered in the entire course of the Pacific War. Therefore, the JCS concluded that there was no guarantee the U.S. could find a Japanese government that would surrender, and even if it did, that Japan’s armed forces would comply with the surrender order. ...Unfortunately, in 1945, Japanese leaders did not regard their situation as catastrophically hopeless. On the contrary, they devised a military-political strategy they called the Ketsu Go (“Operation Decisive”) that they were confident would deliver what they regarded as a satisfactory end to the war, one that would preserve the ultranationalist and militarist old order in Japan. Ketsu Go contained a fundamental premise: Americans, for all their material power, possessed only brittle morale. Japanese leaders believed that by defeating or inflicting high casualties on the initial invasion of the Home Islands, they could break American morale and secure a negotiated end of the war to their taste. ... In the spring, Japan implemented a series of national laws designed to form a seamless unity of the armed forces, government, and the people. All males ages 15- 60 and all females ages 17-40 were drafted into a huge national militia. With Okinawa as the prototype, these individuals were mustered into units to serve in combat support and then combat roles. ... Ketsu Go thus involved the virtual obliteration of meaningful distinctions between combatants and noncombatants and contemplated stupendous numbers of Japanese casualties not just in battle, but also from starvation. the fate of Japan rested in the hands of only eight men. ... There is no record whatsoever that any of these eight men proposed a set of terms or circumstances in which Japan would capitulate prior to Hiroshima. More significantly, none of these men even after the war claimed that there was any set of terms of circumstances that would have prompted Japan to surrender prior to Hiroshima. It makes the 50-year-old revisions look pretty much like a fringe in 2018. Rjensen (talk) 23:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
The historiography connecting Truman to the nuclear bombings is faint: He approved the bombing plan as a matter of course, understanding only that the bombs were much bigger than previous ones. He did not order the bombs built, or direct the bombings in any way. He did not understand the larger consequences, how these first two rather small bombs were ushering in a frightful era of mutually assured destruction. So bringing the "war crime" business here is undue emphasis; it belongs at the article about the debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If blame is to be placed on a war leader or group of leaders, it would have to be on FDR first and foremost, since he ordered the Manhattan Project, then later the top USAAF generals such as Henry H. Arnold, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff who decided to use the new bombs on Japan. Binksternet (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
crimes? I suggest people accused of crimes are assumed innocent unless a court decides otherwise. What court was that? What prosecutor was that? Which RS on Truman agree? Rjensen (talk) 03:00, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
The article does not say that Truman was a war criminal but that critics say his acts (the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki) were war crimes. It is not our job to evaluate but to present information from secondary sources. Please repond to the sources I added to the article. wikitigresito (talk) 04:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey, please do not secondary sources without explaining why they are not reliable. wikitigresito (talk) 14:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
To be more precise, please explain how the following sources are not reliable: Die Zeit, El Espectador, FAZ wikitigresito (talk) 14:52, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Who says these people are serious "critics" -- just one Wiki editor, no one else. the sources are fringe primary sources -- for example an unknown local columnist for a Spanish newspaper in Columbia writes a paragraph with no sources mentioned. If they are experts they will have Wiki articles about them, and they will be cited in established reliable sources. Rjensen (talk) 14:57, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
All of the newspapers are considered to be newspapers of record. I feel like you focus to much on the recepetion in the US denying the existence of critics abroad who are public figures, take a look e.g. at the Zeit article. I can also get you some Japanese sources, but you have to give me some time, because I am not so familiar with Japanese media and academia. wikitigresito (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey, I also got you this source presenting a balanced view of both arguments: El Pais - wikitigresito (talk) 15:10, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Newspaper of record means news reporting by their reporters-- none of them covered Truman in 1945. what you have are not news reports or editorials but op-ed essays by unknown people who are not experts on international law or Truman. Their opinions are primary sources. They are not validated by reliable secondary sources. please read WP:PRIMARY and WP:SCHOLARSHIP and note that the body of scholarship on Truman is thousands of books and articles. Rjensen (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I feel like you only took a look at the El Spectador article, the other ones do not reflect opinions of journalists but give an overview of the debate or prominent opinion voiced by others. Let me know if you need help reading Spanish/German. wikitigresito (talk) 16:16, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I can read it--perhaps you can name an actual critic with Wiki credentials who calls it a war crime. There was no such crime in existence in 1945. Rjensen (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Either you cannot read the sources or you just refuse to read them otherwise you would have encountered such a critic. Not that it would matter, because policy doesn't restrict "critics" to people who have a wiki article. We take into accounted what has been reported in reliable secondary sources. I gave you multiple pieces that clearly state that there is a debate between defenders and critics with the respective points of view. Can you cite anything to contradict this fact? wikitigresito (talk) 19:22, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
can you name a person who is beyond the fringe who says Truman = war criminal? Rjensen (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, please read the Zeit article I posted, the person is clearly named. wikitigresito (talk) 19:35, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
why do you leave the person's name out of this page and the article itself? Rjensen (talk) 19:39, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey, sorry that was unfair. I got annoyed because I felt you were not reading the sources I cite. I mean Klaus Scherer who is a well known journalist and author who has wiki credential on the German wikipedia which is significantly more strict regarding BLP notability than our project. There also several other critics that could be named, not even including Japanese ones. wikitigresito (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
well no. the Zeit article does NOT state that Klaus Scherer says the abomb was a war crime. Zeit does says Scherer's book is not convincing and relies entirely on two older books. (neither of which call Truman's action a war crime) Rjensen (talk) 20:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
That is perfectly true. The review in Zeit is critical about Scherers statements. However, this is not the scope of our discussion. wikitigresito (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Let's take a step back. My point is simply that there is no consensus about this debate and that there are several critics who argue that the bombings were unjustified and constituted war crimes. This overview is outlined for example in this article: El Pais You then asked me to name one serious person with wiki credentials who shares this view. I named Klaus Scherer. We should not get stuck at this point nor argue about procedure, which is why I provide more examples:

  • Yuki Tanaka (historian) asserts this on behalf of eight civil associations[1]
  • Eamonn McCann (politician): "The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had no moral or military justification. It was a crime against humanity"[2]
  • Michael Stohl (professor for international relations) argues that the attack was a "war crime" and "state terrorism"[3]
  • Greg Mitchell (author and journalist) wrote that "Truman failed to pause - and the Nagasaki war crime followed"[4]

wikitigresito (talk) 20:59, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/02/05/voices/u-s-and-japanese-apologies-for-war-crimes-could-pave-way-for-nuclear-disarmament/
  2. ^ https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/eamonn-mccann-hiroshima-was-a-crime-against-humanity-1.2307837
  3. ^ Stohl 1988, p. 279.
  4. ^ https://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/71-years-ago-when-truman_b_11402480.html 71 Years Ago: When Truman Failed To Pause — And The Nagasaki War Crime Followed
It's still WP:UNDUE emphasis to use this biography of Truman to bring attention to the fact that some historians consider both or the second of the atomic bombings unnecessary and some fewer number consider both or just Nagasaki to be a war crime. Truman was never tried for war crimes, and nobody today talks about him as a war criminal. Binksternet (talk) 14:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
I believe you base your assertion on English-language/American media and academia. From my perspective, internationally and for obvious reason particularily in Japan, this point of view is very common. Take a look at the article in El Pais (a moderate conservative paper from Spain) please. I can also provide you some Japanese sources, if you would like to. Regards, wikitigresito (talk) 21:00, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
the El Pais item is a summary of BBC and other British and American historians reports--it adds nothing new to them and it does not quote anyone who says Truman was a war criminal. The reporter is not an expert on Truman or international law. In a word it's a useless source. Do you read Japanese? The Japanese government supports Truman's decisions--there are far-left elements that denounce USA for lots of things. Rjensen (talk) 23:41, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
True, the El Pais source gives an overview which is great for finding balance. Yes, I do read Japanese but not that well which is why it takes me some time to work with Japanese sources. wikitigresito (talk) 09:11, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
I removed the phrase "and therefore constituted a war crime" from the lead section and in exchange I will expand on this point of view a little bit in the body. I agree that the accusation of "war crime" is clearly a minority position in the English-speaking world. My edit is meant to help us achieve a compromise and it does not perfectly reflect what I believe should be in the article but I want to work with you. Please let me know if you agree. Cheers, wikitigresito (talk) 09:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Binksternet and Rjensen what do you think? wikitigresito (talk) 12:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Okay with me. Binksternet (talk) 17:28, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

If anybody wants engage here, please use talk and do not simply edit the article without consensus. wikitigresito (talk) 08:16, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I edited the current introduction back to what it originally was, and kindly asked the editor to stop doing it. I agree, Truman doing what he did is amazing, but it should be kept somewhere else in the page, otherwise it sounds like someone's opinion. Vincinel (talk) 00:38, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

baby boy Truman

The website FindAGrave lists a baby boy, 2 years before the President. The page mentions only this, quote, "There is a reference to this baby in the biography named 'Truman' by David McCullough. It is just one sentence and says 'Mattie's first child, a boy, was stillborn the couple's first autumn in Lamar'." Can anyone provide more information? Elsquared (talk) 04:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@Elsquared: That quote appears to be on page 26 of Truman. The Martha Ellen Young Truman article mentions that the first child died, though the statement is unsourced. Hrodvarsson (talk) 04:48, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Official image

@Lennox Theodore Anderson: The cropped version of the image looks and works much better in the infobox; I reverted your edit to place the uncropped version there. Now you are persistently inserting the cropped image in another section of the article, where it is redundant (being identical) with the image in the infobox. Why? Please stop. General Ization Talk 02:41, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

If you see every prime minister of the United kingdom’s official pages, for example Tony Blair of Theresa May, you will see the fully extracted photo. Even for presidents, this should be a part of all infobox photo's. Lennox Theodore Anderson (talk) 03:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
@Lennox Theodore Anderson: Firstly, your premise is false: the photo in the infobox at Tony Blair is clearly cropped above the waist. Secondly, this is not an article about a British Prime Minister. Stop, please. General Ization Talk 03:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2020

there is a spelling mistake in the text - third paragraph says a "very large policy action" where it should say "very large police action"

thank youTimbrimelow (talk) 05:52, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

I've rephrased to eliminate the error. Thank you. I've also deleted your name and location, probably better not to.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

From Spanish Wikipedia

Aletter from Harry Truman to Bess Truman: “En una carta lamentando el final de la guerra, escribió: "Es una lástima que no podamos entrar y devastar Alemania y cortarle las manos a los niños alemanes y los pies y la cabellera a los ancianos".​“ A case of PTSD?!Rich (talk) 02:44, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

google translated, it is: “In a letter lamenting the end of the war, he wrote: "It is a pity that we cannot enter and devastate Germany and cut off the hands of German children and the feet and hair of the elderly."Rich (talk) 02:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
This surely belongs in English Harry truman article.Rich (talk) 02:50, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
except that no American historian has seen it. Looks like a hoax. Rjensen (talk) 04:44, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
It might be a hoax, yes. By the way, the disturbing quotation doesn’t appear on the Wikipedias in French, German, Italian, Portugese, or Polish.Rich (talk) 12:10, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
The quote seems to first appear on October 30,2010, in an edit by Epozokatrib.Rich (talk) 12:47, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2020

Change Harry S. Truman to Harry S Truman as Harry Truman's middle name is just "S" and isn't short for anything. Joey Ponziani (talk) 21:44, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Not done. See the footnote in the first line of the article and the question posed earlier on this page for examples of why we still use the period. Larry Hockett (Talk) 21:49, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2020

Change Harry S. Truman to Harry S Truman. "S" being his entire middle name, not an abbreviation. Therefore there is no period. 2600:1012:B008:F95D:80:B735:A427:2DDC (talk) 05:43, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: From the hatnote in the first sentence: Truman was not given a middle name, only the initial S. There is controversy over whether the period after the S should be included, or omitted, or if both forms are equally valid. Truman's own archived correspondence suggests that he regularly used the period when writing his name. JTP (talk • contribs) 07:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

The president's middle name is spelled wrong

I know this has been discussed before, but HST was very insistent that there be no period after his middle name. I suggest you honor his memory by spelling it correctly. It is NOT an abbreviation.Arglebargle79 (talk) 12:49, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

The Harry S. Truman Presidential Library makes a pretty compelling case for using the period. It directly addresses your concerns. https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/education/trivia/use-of-period-after-s-truman-name --bief (talk) 16:18, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add back explanation regarding presidents not having a middle name but just an initial. Txguitarman (talk) 20:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Harry S Truman

His name is "Harry S Truman" without a period after the middle initial, because the "S" does not stand for a middle name.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:34, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2020

Harry S Truman is the correct identity, not Harry S. Truman. He did not have a middle name, only an initial Story Gordon (talk) 12:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

​Is addressed in the footnote linked in the first sentence. – Thjarkur (talk) 12:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

First Assassination Attempt is Missing

There is a good discussion of the second assassination attempt. It even calls it the second attempt, but there is no mention of the first attempt (letter bombs). You can find both attempts in the page of all the presidential assassination attempts, but not on Truman's own page.

Reactorfire (talk) 01:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)Reactorfire 10/31/20

Lots of missing citation.

If you can't provide citation then you cant publish it. This wiki needs an overhaul. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.3.83 (talk) 10:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

New lead image

Should we change the lead image to this? The lighting doesn’t obstruct his face like it does in the current image, it’s in color still, it’s a looser crop which is preferred for bios, and it’s a more visually complex image which works better in an infobox. It was also taken during his presidency, in 1952. Thoughts? The Image Editor (talk) 23:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

My proposal
  • Oppose - The lighting for the current image has minimal impact. A closer shot of his face is preferred. The proposed image has lower resolution. Sundayclose (talk) 04:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Sundayclose. ― Tartan357 (Talk) 00:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose bad. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 22:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

The proposed picture looks better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.3.83 (talk) 10:08, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

One thin dime.

One thin dime. ---Dagme (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

New link for reference on cite note describing middle initial.

In the lead cite note where Truman's name is first written, the link used to describe the middle initial in President Truman's name has since been changed by the Truman Library website. Please use the following link in order to circumvent the 404 error: https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/education/trivia/use-of-period-after-s-truman-name 98.160.169.160 (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for the note. Binksternet (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2021

Change "Truman was very hard worker" to "Truman was a very hard worker" 188.228.84.25 (talk) 15:41, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposal for replacing an image

A image of Thomas E. Dewey is used in a sub-section - "1948 election", but the article and section is based on Harry Truman's campaign, not Dewey's. I propose replacing that image any of the images inserted below. The images are in Public domain. Please respond if I missed something. Thanks! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Current Image
Proposed Image 1 - President Truman with Governor Dewey at dedication of the Idlewild Airport, meeting for the first time since nominated by their respective parties for the Presidency.
Proposed Image 1.2 - (Cropped version of Proposed Image 1)
Proposed Image 2 - President Harry S. Truman signs a sheet of new 3-cent stamps from the back of a train in a Kansas City, Missouri train station during his whistle-stop campaign trip to the West Coast.
I would favor the one of the two men shaking hands, possibly cropped a bit.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:06, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Wehwalt: Done — I have added the "Proposed Image 1.2", which is cropped version of "Proposed Image 1". Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:53, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Support image 1.2 which shows the two major party candidates quite clearly, without distracting peripheral imagery. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Cullen328: Also, I have created an article "Harry S. Truman 1948 presidential campaign". Would appreciate your comments regarding the article. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:43, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021

Change “He proposed numerous liberal domestic reforms, but few were enacted by the Conservative Coalition that dominated Congress.“ To “ He proposed numerous modern liberal, or Liberal, domestic reforms, but few were enacted by the Conservative Coalition that dominated Congress.” 2600:1014:B127:B3A0:5C03:D340:38EC:7CD1 (talk) 00:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

"an American politician"

An editor has four times within 24 hours added the statement that Truman was "an American politician" to the lead sentence. Such language is unnecessary per MOS:REDUNDANCY as every US president is an American politician.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

The average reader may not know that every US President is an American politician. The lead should clearly establish what the subject of the article is. Additionally, this is not what MOS:REDUNDANCY refers to. Why don't you go and change this on John F. Kennedy or George W. Bush as well? DeaconShotFire (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
So. You're saying that not everyone knows that a US president is an American, or not everyone knows a US president is a politician?--Wehwalt (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Is it not fleetingly obvious that this is what I'm saying? The lead sentence of the article should clearly establish what the subject is. He was an American politician. This immediately helps the reader establish what the subject is. You also have failed to answer my question about this term being used on other articles. Should Joe Biden's lead sentence be changed to "is the 46th president of the United States"? How exactly do you picture the lead being written when they are listed as having more than one occupation, such as Jimmy Carter (which I wrote) or Barack Obama? You are arguing for the sake of arguing. DeaconShotFire (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
A little assumption of good faith on the part of others goes a long way here. Just saying. Please assume that others' views are just that, views that they hold as sincerely as you do yours.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:20, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
You have failed to respond to anything I have said. DeaconShotFire (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
I have responded. The language you proposed is redundant and unnecessary. The first sentence of MOS:REDUNDANCY tells us to avoid repeating information in the lead sentence. You suggested it was not redundant, and I asked you to clarify, which you did not.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Except I have clarified it, as has @Instant Comma below. That's now two people in favour of this lead and one against, meaning as of now the lead stays as such.
No information is repeated. Furthermore, you've failed to answer my other questions. Should the term "politician" be removed from the leads of Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan, etc? DeaconShotFire (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Of course information is repeated. "American" vs US, president vs a political office. I have no opinion on other articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't matter. The consensus is now against you; do not revert the lead again. DeaconShotFire (talk) 19:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
As I said, 2-1 is not consensus, not in a few hours, and not when you've already been reverted by a second editor who has not yet chosen to weigh in here.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:31, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
I hesitate to involve myself in a heated exchange. For what it's worth, I like the clarity of "American politician." It clearly defines the subject. The subsequent phrase about being president provides additional detail. Let me give an example of why this matters. Edward Blake was Premier of the Canadian province of Ontario and leader of the Canadian Liberal Party. But he was also later a British Member of Parliament, representing an Irish constituency. Ideally, his entry should begin as follows: "Edward Blake was a Canadian and British [or Irish] politician, who served as premier of Ontario and leader of Canada's Liberal Party." You can't assume that because he was Premier of Ontario that he was just a Canadian politician. Truman was much more than President of the United States. He was also a Senator and Vice-President. Both of these are capture in "American politician." Neither is captured in "President of the United States." In short, the lede may seem to contain a redundancy, but a more thorough review shows that it does not. Instant Comma (talk) 18:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Just saying, DeaconShotFire, there is no consensus here. Consensus is not 2-1 in a few hours. You are edit warring. Note that you have been reverted by multiple people. You are up, to my count, to five reverts.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:15, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
I also support adding the politician bit because that helps encompass political offices Truman held (being a Senator and a Vice President) prior to his Presidency. Not redundant at all to include this. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

American politician is being used in many of the 20th-century & all the 21st-century US presidents intros. This includes Joe Biden (the incumbent). GoodDay (talk) 01:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2021

I would replace "he" as the first word of the second sentence of the page with "The Democrat" or similar. For most other major US politicians, their party affiliation is stated immediately in the first or second sentence. For the average reader this is of high relevance to understand his role and should be visible in the pop-up that arises when his article is referenced by other Wikipedia articles and one hovers with the cursor over the link Penta*stefan (talk) 17:21, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I did something toward answering your request. I added, "A lifetime member of the Democratic Party" to the second paragraph.
FYI, the term "democrat" is not an acceptable substitute for "member of the Democratic Party".
Secondly, I think it is too much emphasis on Truman's party affiliation—he was out of step with the Roosevelt New Deal faction of the Democratic Party, holding a more conservative view. But certainly he was interested in spreading the wealth (a Democratic Party view) rather than making the rich even richer. Binksternet (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
"Democrat" is fine as a Noun (ok="Truman and Obama were Democrats") but trouble when used as an adjective (avoid "Democrat policies"--see Democrat Party (epithet)) . Truman supported the New Deal and his Fair Deal echoed it. He was a national leader of the Dem Party from 1944 to his death. Rjensen (talk) 00:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Truman’s name

Truman’s middle name was “S”, without a period since it was not an initial. This, his name should always be presented as “Harry S Truman” (sic). I grew up two blocks from Harry in Independence, Mo. and knew him personally. D. Selby Daselby (talk) 23:33, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

This question comes up so often that we have a Frequently Asked Question entry about it at the top of this page. Basically, Truman himself used a period after the S in his signature and on official documents. That's why we keep the period in there. Binksternet (talk) 23:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Birksternet's post, immediately above, is no longer correct at 2022-03-18, March 18th a year later. There is no such entry now.
D. Selby's historial report is, I am strongly convinced, correct. I do not know, though, that his baptismal oddity needs to be more than a curious footnote.
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 02:20, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

It’s an endless debate. Even Truman himself flip flopped on it. There are signatures with and without the period. The National Archives uses it, the National Park Service doesn’t. Rangerdj (talk) 20:40, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021

There is no period after the "S" in "Harry S Truman". A period indicates it is an abbreviation, and it is not an abbreviation of anything. Missouriman17 (talk) 21:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: See the faq in the page header. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
There is no such "faq in the page header" on March 18, 2022. Perhaps somebody had the apparently reasonable notion that it was a lot of nonsense and took it away. I don't know.
The facts are clear. As a baby he had no period after his middle name, "S" , it is sure.
It shouldn't be too difficult for the original author of the main piece to include a dignified, non-controversial, reference to the whole thing in there somewhere. It is relevant to all the questions of social mobility, frontier insecurity, and on and on and on, that are so much of the American fabric. It's a small but still significant little bit of history and deserves to be handled responsibly.
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 02:33, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
The FAQ at the top of this talk page certainly includes the question of whether the middle initial gets a period. Perhaps your viewing device isn't letting you see it.
If you have some reliable source connecting the middle initial with "social mobility, frontier insecurity", etc., then feel free to share it. I'm sure such a source would be a good addition. Binksternet (talk) 02:51, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2022

Harry S Truman is the correct spelling of this president. his parents could not decide on 2 family names (shipp or solomon) so they comprised with S . . . there should not be a period after his middle initial 74.188.241.240 (talk) 03:39, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done. He signed his named with a period after the S.
We have a FAQ at the top of this page addressing the issue. Binksternet (talk) 03:45, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Education

Truman is famous for not attending college. Did he really attend law school or the business college cited? 2601:602:9403:4EE0:B44F:56A0:A587:397B (talk) 23:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Truman absolutely attended Spalding's and the Kansas City Law School, just as the sources cited in the footnotes indicate. Attended does not mean graduated from, which is also indicated in the article.
If you want additional verification, you can view:
This one
This one
This one
This one
This one
This one
Billmckern (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Typographical Error

Under the heading, *Labor unions, strikes and economic issues*, it seems to me that the phrase "makor industries" should be "major industries." When I spot small errors, I usually correct them myself, but apparently I can't do that on this article? Ccheitmann (talk) 20:42, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I took care of it. The article is semi-protected because of persistent vandalism. Larry Hockett (Talk) 20:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

There is no period after the S in his name. It isn’t anything more than the letter S

Fix his name! Take the period mark out after the letter S 207.5.44.224 (talk) 14:02, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

See Q1 above. Ian Dalziel (talk) 14:08, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2023

The audio recording of Truman’s voice regarding the Potsdam Conference is from August 9, 1945, not November 1948 as indicated. Source: Truman archive of radio broadcasts. Note that the November 1948 incorrectly referenced, was an election victory broadcast after Truman prevailed over Thomas Dewey and has nothing to do with the Potsdam Conference. Very embarrassing mistake. Reference: https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/soundrecording-records/sr61-60-remarks-victory-celebration-independence

2605:A601:A962:AC00:7CD7:30DD:44A8:2EF3 (talk) 01:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Name

S was his middle name, not an initial, so it shouldn't be followed by a period/stop Northern rock (talk) Northern rock (talk) 09:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Have you read the FAQ above? Wehwalt (talk) 12:58, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
It's wrong. His middle name was simply "S" and should be written as such for something as important as an encyclopedia article. Period. (So to speak.) We should strive for utmost accuracy rather than sheepishly adhere to the slapdash haphazard herd. Racing Forward (talk) 01:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

It's been established by the Chicago Manual of Style, the US Government Printing Office Style Manual, and the Truman Library that the period should be used. Truman himself used it. It bugs the Type A in me, but I have to defer to the above sources for consistency and the man's own usage. https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/education/trivia/use-of-period-after-s-truman-name Seeker095 (talk) 22:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 8 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. The arguments on WP:TRAINWRECK are in fact correct. It appears as though I misjudged how much consistency was necessary. I was attempting to avoid the possibility of confusion with multiple RMs, but I see now that may be unavoidable, if a review of the links shows that any of the moves may be supported by COMMONNAME. Cheers! Estar8806 (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

– WP:COMMONNAME, WP:CONCISE and WP:CONSISTENT. The middle initial is unnecessary as these Presidents are all WP:PRIMARYTOPICs and the inclusion of the middle initial is not overwhelmingly common for any of them. I have provided sources, the first in each line is a Google Trend and the second is an Ngram.
(1) For Truman [1][2]
(2)For Eisenhower [3] [4]
(3) For Harding [5] [6]
(4) For Polk [7][8]
(5) For Hayes [9][10]
(6) For Garfield [11] [12]
(7) For Arthur [13] [14]
(8) For Grant [15] [16]
For those who may support some and not others, I have numbered the nominations so you could simply say Support 1, 2, 3 & 4 and Oppose 5, 6, 7 and 8, for example, if you so choose.
Finally, the exclusion of Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson was intentional as they are all well-known by their initials FDR, JFK and LBJ respectively, which cannot be said for the articles I've nominated. These others should be discussed separately if there is evidence that the middle initial is more commonly excluded than included. A quick note that I would encourage the google trends provided be weighted more heavily than the Ngrams as a recent RM possibly brought up some flaws in the Ngram programming. Cheers! Estar8806 (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

  • Oppose Truman; he's commonly known as "Harry S Truman" because "S" is his middle name. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Unavoidable WP:TRAINWRECK since such requests should all be discussed separately. Trying to discuss all of these at once is going to be a mess, and this should be closed. Steel1943 (talk) 00:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
  • close immediately this is a WP:TRAINWRECK, the links don't clearly back this move for any of them and these should be discussed individually—blindlynx 01:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A quick note that I would encourage the google trends provided be weighted more heavily than the Ngrams as a recent RM possibly brought up some flaws in the Ngram programming. FYI, the issue was with the formatting of the query, not ngrams itself. The issue was corrected in that RM, and does not apply to these queries. BilledMammal (talk) 02:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
@BilledMammal Thank you for that note. I looked at the Ngrams in that RM and tried to see if I could determine the problem, or if someone else had and I hadn't noticed. I'm glad the issue was resolved so hopefully there won't be any issues with Ngrams in future RMs. Estar8806 (talk) 03:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2023

Please do this. 81.102.123.104 (talk) 11:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Done. Good catch.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 4 April 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) {{ping|ClydeFranklin}} (t/c) 06:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Harry S. Truman → Harry Truman – Although the above move request was closed as trainwreck, I believe this page still merits a move for the reasons suggested. On NGRAMS, Harry Truman is about the same as Harry S Truman and Harry S. Truman combined, but on Google Trends the former is far more common. On Google Scholar in the last few years, Harry Truman has a slight advantage. Article titles also should be concise where possible, which is an additional point to make in favor of the shorter name, which already redirects to this article. (t · c) buidhe 05:56, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose - Still believe the current title is marginally better (I've always known him as Harry S. Truman) but the evidence put forward is sound. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 09:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose for much the same reasons. The evidence doesn't seem strong enough to warrant a move. Possibly I'm biased since I date from an era when middle initials were more commonly used than today.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:00, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose. For one, I'm unconvinced by the concise rational, that should only be used if the title is too long. No one could reasonably argue that "Harry S Truman" is a mouthful. And I'm not super convinced this is WP:COMMONNAME. If I google "Harry Truman", most of the results on the front page still include "Harry S Truman". A "slight" average in a few sites in the past recent years is not enough given that he is most likely referred to with the S. --Quiz shows 11:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Unlike some of the others listed in the previous RM, he is sometimes seen without his middle initial, but more commonly with. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Support for encyclopedic accuracy. Incorrectly abbreviating his middle name "S" by adding a period misleads readers, which should not be Wikipedia's intention if it can be avoided, which this nomination does. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:20, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
    It is not a misrepresentation, as he always signed his name as "Harry S. Truman" rather than "Harry S Truman." (See the signature in the infobox.) Properly, his middle name is "S." rather than just "S" as is commonly explained. Asplatin (talk) 19:32, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Most often represented in sources with middle initial. Binksternet (talk) 15:38, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Just to point out, it's not an initial (an initial is an abbreviation, Truman's "S" is the entire name). Randy Kryn (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
  • It's true that it's not an initial of one name, but as he was given it to honour his two grandfathers it is treated the same way. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:56, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. Per the White House, his name is commonly "Harry S. Truman." See below.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/ Asplatin (talk) 19:33, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. I think he is already at the right title. The hatnote ([b]) explains why he used it and should be common usage to this article. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 22:12, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harry_S._Truman/Archive_7&oldid=1171781773"