Talk:Presidency of George W. Bush/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Merge

At this AfD (link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George W. Bush's first term as President of the United States), User:Orser67 proposed to merge George W. Bush's first term as President of the United States and George W. Bush's second term as President of the United States into Presidency of George W. Bush as no other US presidency article is divided into terms. On the AfD the user said, "Proposing a merger and re-direct of George W. Bush's first term as President of the United States and George W. Bush's second term as President of the United States to presidency of George W. Bush. No other (U.S.) presidency article is similarly divided into terms, and Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of Bush's presidency would benefit from having one comprehensive Bush presidency article organized by topic rather than chronologically. Including pictures, the three articles are a combined 220k bytes, which is comparable to the Obama presidency article, so excessive length is not a concern. Finally, all three articles need re-writing and re-organization anyway and merging the three articles into one article would be a boon to that effort, which I would at least begin." -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions}) 19:37, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

• Merge The first 100 days are a separately notable topic, but the first term is just the first half of the presidency. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:06, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
• Merge If that is the standard, then i see no reason not to apply it here. Bonewah (talk) 18:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

With no objections over the last couple of days, I went ahead and merged the articles into one article. The new article needs a bit of work, and imo is missing a few sections on campaign finance reform, Sarbanes-Oxley, and DR-CAFTA. Several other sections needs expansion or re-writing, and pretty much every section needs better sourcing. Orser67 (talk) 06:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Presidency of George W. Bush. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210152314/http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/13/power.plant.emissions/index.html to http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/13/power.plant.emissions/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081212054358/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/14/bush.global.warming/index.html to http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/14/bush.global.warming/index.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 05:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Straight-up whitewashing

I added content on the following topics:

• The Bush administration claimed the Saddam Hussein regime possessed WMDs and that Hussein had an operational relationship with al-Qaeda. I added text that no WMDs were ever found in Iraq and that the existence of a Saddam-Al-Qaeda relationship contradicted the consensus in the intel community.
• The Bush administration argued that the Bush tax cuts would pay for themselves (and that they did so). I added text noting that this was contradicted by every credible assessment.
• Bush argued that the scientific community was divided on whether global warming was caused by human activity. I noted that the scientific consensus is that human activity is a primary contributor to climate change.

My edits were reverted with the mind-boggling rationale, "This is a biographical article, not an article about Bush administration policies". Not only is this an article about the Bush administration, but the text I added directly relates to actions taken by Bush (he argued that Iraq had WMDs, he argued that tax cuts paid for themselves, and he falsely claimed that the scientific community was divided on the causes of climate change). The text should be restored ASAP. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:01, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I started a discussion on the Fringe theory noticeboard about one of the items above: Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard/Archive 73#George W Bush in 2006: a "debate" existed about causes of climate change. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 01:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

"Bush era" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Bush era. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 21#Bush era until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Interstellarity (talk) 16:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Cabinet Table

Request to make a table for the Cabinet of George W. Bush like the ones made for Obama, Trump and Biden's cabinet pages. (Aricmfergie (talk) 22:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Additional tables would not enhance the article and so are not necessary.Drdpw (talk) 23:21, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

"Bush Dick Incident" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Bush Dick Incident and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 15#Bush Dick Incident until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:17, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

"Bush Dick Affair" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Bush Dick Affair and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 5#Bush Dick Affair until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:37, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Abu Ghraib prisoner torture image

The iconic photographs of torture at Abu Ghraib became defining images of the War on Terror.

My diff (shown at right) was reverted by Drdpw with the comment "Adds nothing substantive to article". The images of the torture that occurred at Abu Ghraib were immensely consequential in shaping public opinion about the Iraq War and the U.S.'s torture of detainees. "The Hooded Man" in particular is considered an iconic image from the Iraq War – I included sources on this as well. Its inclusion is absolutely justified. Looking at the other images from the article, some of them appear to be more "decoration" that don't add substance to the article, e.g. File:Bush discusses social security in Virginia 2005.jpg. I'm not arguing for less pictures – illustration is important. This image from Abu Ghraib specifically illustrates the torture that was a major aspect of Bush's presidency, and the image absolutely contributes to this.-Ich (talk) 18:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Given nobody has replied or objected to my reasoning above, I will be bold and re-add this.-Ich (talk) 19:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Given that nobody replied or affirmed your reasoning above, it should remain out. This image from Abu Ghraib specifically illustrates that you have a non-neutral point of view regarding the subject of torture in connection with the G. W. Bush's presidency. Drdpw (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Apologies, I'm still not certain what your argument against this photo's inclusion is, but I would like to ask you not to make assumptions about my views. NPOV means affording the RSs due weight; the RSs I cited describe the photo as "iconic" and "influential". The Abu Ghraib photos had a major, worldwide impact on public opinion of the Global War on Terror; this one in particular was widely reproduced. That these photos "elicited widespread outrage" has long since been included in the body text. This photo accurately illustrates that body text and helps the reader understand the public reaction.

I would actually argue the opposite of your point: arbitrarily excluding an iconic, suitably licensed image that is discussed in the body text isn't a neutral stance: it violates NPOV by deliberately eliding something RSs consider important. These images were a major event in Bush's presidency and leaving this out makes the article less complete.-Ich (talk) 09:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Detainees upon arrival at Camp X-Ray, January 2002

As the paragraph's focus is "Guantanamo Bay and enemy combatants" I propose that this picture would be more fitting. Drdpw (talk) 15:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Great suggestion; this photo was also widely disseminated and is aligned with the section header.-Ich (talk) 16:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

References