![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 45 | ← | Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 |
I just took a look at the Recovery.gov copyright info page and it appears that all content on the site - even the content produced by third-party vendors - is either public domain or CC-BY. In particular there's a high-quality video on the front page that would be a great demonstration of Obama's oratory style. Might be other media to dig out of there too, for this article and for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act article. Dcoetzee 01:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I WOULD SUBMIT THAT INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IN THIS ARTICLE IS APPROPRIATE. IT IS ACCURATE, NEUTRAL, INTERESTING AND SUPPORTED BY FACTUAL REFERENCE. IT IS IN NO WAY OFFENSIVE, DEFAMATORY OR PROFANE.
It does not dispute his USA citizenship or his entitlement to be president based on birth. In fact the proposed footnote says "Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC."
USA law does not prohibit dual citizeship ( http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html). Supreme Court rulings in United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark (1898), Perkins v. Elg (1939), Mandoli v. Acheson, 344 U.S. 133 (1952), Kawakita v. U.S. (1952), Afroyim_v._Rusk 387 U.S. 253 (1967) and Vance v. Terrazas 444 U.S. 252 (1980), address citizenship.
Similar information is included in the William Henry Harrison article (and is usually included in any biography of President Harrison without controversy). It seems uncontroversal here as well.
The fact of the matter is that he held dual citizenship in the USA and the British Empire at birth. He lost the British citizenship on December 12, 1963 and became a citizen of Kenya. Thus from December 12, 1963 until August 4, 1982 he held dual citizenship in the USA and Kenya. He lost Kenyan citizenship on his 21st birthday.
Suggested Text:
Obama is the first President of the United States to have been born a British Citizen since William Henry Harrison.
Suggested footnote:
[2] When Barack Obama Jr. was born in 1961 Kenya was a British colony. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status and the citizenship of his children was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): "Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth." Therefore, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.
see also http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Overseas_citizen
Natwebb ( talk) 07:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
If there were a source that is more reliable and more to the point than those given, I think a brief mention of Obama's (possible) dual citizenship during his early life might be possible to include in "Early life". It's definitely not lead material or anything like that. But we need some sources that say this in clear, non-retracted, and factual manners... some WP:OR about what "must be true" is no good. LotLE× talk 08:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
The problem here is the old slippery slope. Analogous to the anti-abortion crowd who, having have failed to get abortion rights overturned outright, have gone pecking around the edges, proposing small bills to make things slightly more restrictive then build on that with more, etc... The citizenship conspiracy theorists, having failed utterly on the main front, are trying to slink in the side door, to try to establish that possessing dual citizenship can invalidate one from being a "natural-born citizen". What dual citizenship Obama may or may not have had...a citizenship lost at age 2 (British) and at then at age 21 (Kenyan)...is about as trivial as the left-handedness issue is. Summation; I cannot accept that this entry is being proposed in good faith. Bad faith does not automatically invalidate the proposed material, but that and the apparent trivial nature of the material is strike 1 and strike 2, IMO. Discussing the history of his birth and who his mother and father were is a natural part of history. Delving into the actually citizenship of any of the three is where ulterior motives here come into play. Tarc ( talk) 15:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Seems like a bit of trivia too obscure to be worth mentioning. - 137.222.114.243 ( talk) 17:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
← I'm with Tarc and Thuran on this. I find it hard to see this as anything other than an attempt to back-door bogus citizenship questions. In addition, this factoid has not been shown to have any relevance to the man's life and career, which is what this biography covers. We make decisions all the time about what goes in here or not - and I mean valid, verifiable, well-sourced points of interest - because of space and weight concerns, and we have left out many items from this biography for those reasons. This is trivia, and unless some relevance can be attached to how it affected his life, his thinking, his educational and career decisions, etc., and unless we have good sourcing for it, it doesn;t belong here. We don't even have a source that verifies that he even knew about this at his 21st birthday or any time later until perhaps the recent intense interest in his birthright. For example, does he talk in his memoir about deciding not to affirm Kenyan citizenship? Has he acknowledged this anywhere? Did it have any impact on his life whatsoever? Tvoz/ talk 10:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Under British law, he was a dual citizen. Since the USA does not abide by British law. The USA recognizes him as a Natural Born Citizen of Hawaii. It is a bit of interesting trivia that british law would regard him as a citizen until the early 80's, however since we go by US law in the US. It's not noteworthy. He was not born a British Citizen. He was born an American, seeing as how thats where he was born, in america. Had he been born in British governed land, then he'd be a British citizen. -- DemocraplypseNow ( talk) 18:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Citizenship laws are very complicated when it comes to dual nationals because often laws conflict and new born babies can't choose their citizenship. As I've understood it, US law has allowed for its citizens to hold dual nationality with no problems (although officials can be petty - British politician Boris Johnson was born in New York and once when travelling home from the USA with his family he was told he had to travel on a US passport - I think he's since renounced his US citizenship because of this). When Kenya became independent Obama's British citizenship transferred to Kenyan. Kenyan law does not allow for its adult citizens to be dual nationals - they have to renounce their foreign citizenship or lose their Kenyan citizenship on their twenty-first birthday. Kenyan law cannot take away US citizenship, only Kenyan and vice versa.
Obama was born a dual national - US by birth (and by his mother), British colonial as the son of his father, with the latter converting to Kenyan when he was 2. When he was a child each citizenship was held without any regard to the laws governing any other, as is standard. But because he failed to renounce his US citizenship by the time he was 21 (i.e. old enough to make a choice himself), his Kenyan citizenship automatically lapsed.
Now a lot of people around the world qualify for more than one citizenship - for example a lot of Australians qualify for at least one European Union country citizenship on the parent or grandparent rule and many will take out the relevant passport for ease of travel. And many national football teams have exploited the grandparent rule to sign up talented players from their diaspora - the Republic of Ireland team got a particular reputation for this a couple of decades ago. And one could go on. Most of the relevant articles don't cover this unless the individual in question has made use of it. Unless Obama ever actually made use of his non-US citizenships then the matter is utterly trivial and has no place here. Timrollpickering ( talk) 09:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Why is the lead so short all of a sudden? An article of this size should have 4 bulky paragraphs. — R 2 22:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Here's what I think might be a good layout of the lead:
LonelyMarble, just a quick comment, before too much of this inclusion fest gets fussed over or trimmed, according to my toolbox Page size stats, the article size is currently only 32 kB (5293 words) of readable prose. Thus, per the lead guideline, this size translates to only two or three lede paragraphs. Modocc ( talk) 03:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC) To anyone that wants to add the page size function to your toolbox, create a User:username/monobook.js page with the following added to it:
importScript('User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js'); //[[User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js]]
Your User:username/monobook.js page can be created by going to the Skins under your preferences, clicking on the monobook's Custom JS and saving the new page. -- Modocc ( talk) 05:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
He is multiracial. His mother was caucasion. See NNDB for details.fjw75@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.65.17 ( talk) 13:41, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
What sect of Christianity is Obama part of? I know that he used to be part of the United Church of Christ but right now it doesn't seem like he's really a part of any of them. Could someone elaborate on this? I know this might have been answered in the archives but I haven't a clue on which section it was. My President is Black ( talk) 04:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Note that in a recently archived discussion the contribution of a similar designation to the infobox was objected to for the professed (no pun intended) reason that it was unsourced (I think; it was hard to follow the objector's reasoning) -- so I've finally got around to adding " law school instructor ( Constitutional law)" with a note. It's interesting/useful IMO to mention politicians' academic occupations, those who've had them (eg Moynihan as a scholar in sociology, Gingrich as a historian/untenured history prof, etc.). ↜Just me, here, now … 17:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
User:Tvoz has now improved the phrasing and, rightly, also removed the footnote, since the assertion is already documented lower down in the article's text. I'd only included a ref to forstall another claim that it hadn't been documented adequately: In the archived thread I'd argued, "[A]s for [the contention] 'It's expected that prominent lawyers lecture' I hope upon reflection you'll admit this undocumented line of attack is a bit bizarre!" -- the response to which was, "[T]hat's funny considering you accused me of violating WP:OR after deleting your addition of unsourced content. You are the one with the bizarre thinking[...]." ↜Just me, here, now … 04:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Kauffner's latest repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits to an Obama-related article:
Kauffner's only other contributions to Obama-related articles have also been repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits to
The Audacity of Hope,
Dreams from My Father, and
Project Vote.
See:
Talk:The Audacity of Hope#Reception - repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits
Please immediately cease and desist making repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits to Obama-related Wikipedia articles. Newross ( talk) 23:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
is an exceptionally poor source because it completely omits the most basic information that a 'present' vote in the Illinois General Assembly—where a constitutional majority ( absolute majority) is required to pass a bill—is in effect a 'no' vote:Hernandez, Raymond; Drew, Christopher (December 20, 2007). It’s not just ‘ayes’ and ‘nays’: Obama’s votes in Illinois echo. The New York Times, p. A1.
basic information not omitted from articles by Illinois reporters who covered the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield for several years, [27] like: Dan Vock [28], Rick Pearson [29], Ray Long [30], and Chris Wills [31]:Mikva, Abner J. (February 16, 2008). 'Present' perfect. The New York Times, p. A19.
Zorn, Eric (September 9, 2008). Obama’s foes fire same old cheap shot. Chicago Tribune, p. 1 (Metro).
Newross ( talk) 07:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Newross ( talk) 19:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)Vock, Daniel C. (January 25, 2008). 'Present' votes defended by Ill. lawmakers. Stateline.org.
Pearson, Rick; Long, Ray (February 3, 2008). 'Present votes emerging from the past. Chicago Tribune, p. 13.
Wills, Christopher (Associated Press) (September 23, 2008). Parsing the political present tense.. USA Today.com.
I thought I'd notify some of the page regulars... The link about his smoking is broken. It was here but the url doesn't seem to work. I removed it and replaced it with a cn. -- Happyme22 ( talk) 04:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I never heard, that Barack Obama is german descent. His sister from Kenya lived many years in Germany and speak perfect German. 77.22.172.233 ( talk) 12:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
“ | Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review gained national media attention [1] and led to a publishing contract and advance for a book about race relations. [2] | ” |
ought to flow better
“ | Having been elected as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, Obama's volitive editorial focus upon black women in history made headlines and led to a publishing contract and advance for a book about race relations. [2] [3] | ” |
Harvard Law 1990
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Ottre 14:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I just removed some "material" about him being a british citizen. This is probably the usuall nonsense. If so, can somebody please delete this section as not being a forum or advise such and I will delete this myself, thanks in advance. -- Tom 17:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I think Wikidemon makes a really excellent point and analogy above. Who Britain may or may not consider a citizen is really of little weight to Obama's life, having never done anything to claim or utilize that citizenship to which he was (purportedly) eligible. The analogy with Israel is a good one here. Their laws give automatic citizenship to "Jews" (defined under a specific religious theory of what that means). Who would editors feel about adding to the Al Franken article that he "Has automatic Israeli citizenship" (even though he has no particular association or allegiance with that country)? It just wouldn't seem remotely relevant there. In any case, the citation for the British citizenship claim is a bit weak. We only have one source, which isn't a terrible one, but seems to be engaging in a bit of amature lawyering. If the British Government had made some official statement that Obama, specifically, was formerly a citizen, and sources reported that, it would be quite a bit stronger. But what we have is a source giving its own (not unreasonable, but not legally binding) interpretation of British (and Kenyan) law. Moreover, there aren't any wealth of other source rushing in to mention the importance of this same "fact". It doesn't add up to something currently worth including. LotLE× talk 05:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
There are two issues here which must both be addressed. First is notability, which is being debated above, but the more important issue is verifiability. We must keep in mind that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. The most recent restoration of this point is a series of breadcrumbs leading a reader on a path of original research, which is not appropriate for any Wikipedia article, much less a high-profile one. Even if we accept the breadcrumbs at face value, it's simply not enough, because the first reference is not independent, the second is a Wikipedia page, and the rest are citations of law which would require us as editors to be asserting that we are qualified to interpret applicable law, which we not only aren't qualified to do, but are not allowed to do under existing policy. This tidbit may be true, and it may be interesting...but it cannot be included in the article as it is currently written. Frank | talk 14:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
(Unindent) Also it may not be 100% clear that other Presidents in the interim weren't notionally British citizens under the parent and, I think, grandparent rules. Remember that it wasn't so well codified in the nineteenth century. It is amateur lawyering to retroactively apply the laws, especially if none of them ever availed themselves of any such entitlement. Timrollpickering ( talk) 23:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Collapsed due to WP:BLP and WP:FRINGE. Not even worth discussion. -- Bobblehead (rants) 23:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
As has been said previously, Wikipedia is not a place to discuss politics and your opinion of politics. The fact is that it has NOT been verified that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, and has not been verified in which hospital he was born in. This is what all those pending lawsuits concern. I move that the text claiming him to be born in Hawaii is invalid and should be removed until undeniable proof has been brought forward that he was born there. Do not point to the "Certification of live birth". That document has been proven by Dr. Ron Polarik to be a fraud. If Wikipedia truly exists to be a hub to receive factual information, only valid information that has been proved and is irreputable should be valid on this site. Tom, with all due respect, the concern about him being a citizen with inherited loyalty to the British Crown, and being a citizen to the jurisdiction to the Crown, is valid. To suggest otherwise would be an example of political views interfering with an article. Not putting such a thing on here is not a good execution of NPOV. Read right below the edit box. "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". Him being born in Hawaii in the hospital mentioned is not irreputable, and for all intents and purposes, and to remain pursuant to Wikipedia's policies, should be removed unless proven to be accurate verifiable. Refusal to do so would be to voluntarily break Wikipedia's Terms of Service. |
As "presidential" is not a proper adverb, the first letter shouldn't be capitalized. It's not capitalized elsewhere in the article, so, let's go for some stylistic consistency here with the subsections. -- Kudzu1 ( talk) 21:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but, is that actually his real name? It seems like vandalism to me (considering all the fake rumors about him being a terrorist), and I was about to revert it, when suddenly I saw that, in the edit history, several recognizable editors (clearly not vandals) made constructive edits to the article while ignoring the name. I would like to know whether this is vandalism or otherwise. Thanks in advance, Dogcowsaysmoof Talk Guestbook Barnstar Gallery Sandbox 00:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I reverted some apparently unnecessary changes by Bratz angel14. Most reliable sources refer to Obama's earlier occupation as a "lawyer", and not an "attorney"; moreover, shortening Hawaii to "HI" would confuse non-Americans. These are typical of the changes I reverted. -- Scjessey ( talk) 16:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Under "Family and personal life," it says: "in 2005 the family moved from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house"... no longer "their current"! Perhaps it should read "to a $1.6 million house"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.17.176 ( talk) 08:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
While on visit in a middle east country, a man approached the white house gate saying he needed to see Barack Obama(he really did not). When the security asked the man to step out of the car, a pistol was found in the back of his trunk. Sources: Despierta America (On Univision) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.86.77 ( talk) 21:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
. . .
aloha nui loa,
excuse my ignorance as an outsider, but was Obama born on Hawaii?
Or on Oahu?
Under American practice, it is quite normal to refer to the state name as a birthplace, e.g. Alaska, Alabama.
But in an encyclopaedic reference, should there be tighter reference in the introduction to his actual birth island?
Even if all that means is saying he was born on Oahu, Hawaii ? I note that the Wikipedia entry for Abraham Lincoln refers to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hodgenville,_Kentucky, not just Kentucky?
i mua,
jason
avaiki ( talk) 16:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
. . .
ps: please excuse my poor formatting - wikipedia confuses me, apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avaiki ( talk • contribs) 16:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
The article needs to mention Obama administration's strong stance against outsourcing and its possible consequences. The issue has already been covered extensively by international media [37] [38] [39]. -- 128.211.201.161 ( talk) 17:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
How Rezko should be included was THE most contentious issue in the history of this article. An (imperfect) compromise consensus was reached in mid-July 2008 (see Talk:Barack Obama/Archive 30#Rick's opinion). The consensus wording had remained completely unchanged for 7 months and the cited references had remained unchanged except for some pruning.
The consensus on wording and references was upset by an inaccurate, contentious February 9, 2009 edit by ChildofMidnight, a February 21, 2009 expansion by Happyme22, and a February 25, 2009 slight condensation by Wikidemon, the net result of which was a longer, less accurate, and more contentious Rezko section with an additional dated reference.
I attempted to restore the wording to the February 9, 2009 pre- ChildofMidnight 7-month-old consensus wording and references (except changing "their current $1.6 million house" to "a $1.6 million house" and changing "Rezko's indictment and subsequent conviction" to "Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction" for clarity), but my attempt to restore the consensus wording and references was reverted three and a half hours later by Tad Lincoln saying the "Rezko section had just been condensed prior to" my "unexplained reversion."
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood. The purchase of an adjacent lot and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer and friend Tony Rezko attracted media attention because of Rezko's indictment and subsequent conviction on political corruption charges unrelated to Obama.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, in 2005 the family moved from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood. The purchase of the property was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a major political contributor to Obama, who later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. The transaction attracted media attention because of Rezko's later indictment and subsequent conviction on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, in 2005 the family moved from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood. The purchase of the property was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a major political contributor to Obama, who bought an undeveloped lot adjecent to the Obama property on the same day as Obama, and later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. The transaction attracted media attention because of Rezko's later indictment and subsequent conviction on political corruption charges for unrelated activities. Nonetheless, Obama later said that the deal was a "mistake on my part and I regret it."
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, where they lived until moving into the White House. The purchase transaction, which Obama called a "mistake" on his part, later attracted media attention because it was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a fundraiser and contributor to Obama's political campaigns, who bought an adjacent undeveloped lot on the same day. and later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. Rezko was later indicted and convicted on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, Chicago. The purchase of an adjacent lot and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer and friend Tony Rezko attracted media attention because of Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction on political corruption charges that were unrelated to Obama.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, where they lived until moving into the White House. The purchase transaction, which Obama called a "mistake" on his part, later attracted media attention because it was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a fundraiser and contributor to Obama's political campaigns, who bought an adjacent undeveloped lot on the same day. and later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. Rezko was later indicted and convicted on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, Chicago. The purchase of an adjacent lot and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer and friend Tony Rezko attracted media attention because of Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction on political corruption charges that were unrelated to Obama.
Concur
I concur with Wikidemon latest edit; I would consider adding "fundraiser" to the sentence, if there is consensus to do so:
developer and friend Tony Rezko → developer, friend and fundraiser Tony Rezko
Newross ( talk) 19:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
First off, I apologize, for I was unaware of the numerous discussions that have taken place regarding this issue. That said, I do feel that the version that I saw on the page before I changed it (apparently ChildofMidnight's version) glossed over one huge detail: that the transactions ocurred on the same day. We do not know the fine-print details, but it is nonetheless one of the most important aspects of the story.
So may I propose this compromise:
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, where they lived until moving into the White House. The purchase transaction later attracted media attention because it was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a fundraiser and contributor to Obama's political campaigns, who bought an adjacent undeveloped lot on the same day and later sold part of the lot to the Obamas. Rezko was later indicted and convicted on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
I took out the "mistake" part, because I think that is what may have been frusterating people. Looking at it from another perspective, I could see how it may add a little unnecessary weight to the passage. That said, it is only two sentences, and I don't see the above proposal as having a weight problem. I hope that this compromise will satisfy all parties.
I hope that my good friend Tvoz, of all people, will believe me when I say that this is not an attempt to slander Obama at all, whatsoever. He is my president now, I wish him well, and I hope he succeeds. But the Rezko deal was a major story and, like it or not, is apart of Barack Obama's biography and always will be. That is why it should be told, not excluding major details. I hope editors consider my words. Thanks in advance. Best, Happyme22 ( talk) 01:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
...is stale, given that Obama is now in office. What he said he would do if elected is kind of moot now that he is in office, right? That he seemed to change his position during the campaign on withdrawal from Iraq does not matter much compared to what he actually does. A quick look shows that half to three quarters of this section is surplus at this point, and could be replaced carefully by a discussion of his actual political positions as opposed to campaign posturing. Wikidemon ( talk) 08:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure there's plenty of precedent for this. Any "political positions" page for a currently active politician is going to be a work in progress. That doesn't mean it isn't useful. marbeh raglaim ( talk) 02:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Obama's unexpected landslide victory in the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate primary election:
Some of those voters may have been thinking what I'm thinking: that Obama has the potential to be the most significant political figure Illinois has sent to Washington since Abraham Lincoln. Even as I look at those words on the computer screen before me, I realize that seems a little outlandish. It takes in a lot of territory, maybe too much too soon. But that's an honest assessment.
If he is elected in November, Obama will immediately replace Colin Powell as the person most talked about to be the first African-American elected president of the United States. That's a heavy load to put on any 42-year-old. Everybody who goes to the U.S. Senate thinks he's going to be president someday. Obama is one of the handful who really could be. [40]
Partisans in Washington consider him a shooting star in the November elections. A few whisper about a presidential future. "He's the real deal," says Sen. Jon Corzine, D-N.J., chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. [42]
Wording
He won decisively in the March primary, dispatching the other six candidates easily, and winning more than 50 percent of the vote.
From a crowded field of seven candidates, Obama received over 52% of the vote in the March 16, 2006 primary, emerging well ahead of his Democratic rivals.
Obama received over 52% of the vote in the March 2004 primary, emerging 29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival.
He won the March primary with 52% of the vote.
In March 2004 he won a surprise landslide victory with 53% of the vote in a seven-candidate field—29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival—in the most expensive U.S. Senate primary in history.
He won the March primary with 52% of the vote.
References
17. Illinois Primary 2004: Primary Elections Results, Chicago Tribune
44. Davey, Monica (March 17, 2004). From Crowded Field, Democrats Choose State Legislator to Seek Senate Seat. New York Times
See also:
Jackson, John S (August 2006). The Making of a Senator: Barack Obama and the 2004 Illinois Senate Race Occasional Paper of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute (Southern Illinois University).
61. Mendell, David (March 17, 2004). Obama routs Democratic foes; Ryan tops crowded GOP field; Hynes, Hull fall far short across state. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Fornek, Scott; Herguth, Robert C. (March 17, 2004). Obama defeats Hull's millions, Hynes' name; Consistent effort results in landslide for Hyde Parker. (paid archive). Chicago Sun-Times, p. 2.
Davey, Monica (March 18, 2004). As quickly as overnight, a Democratic star is born. The New York Times, p. A20.
Howlett, Debbie (March 19, 2004). Dems see a rising star in Illinois Senate candidate. USA Today, p. A04.
Mendell (2007), pp. 235–246.
60. From Crowded Field, Democrats Choose State Legislator to Seek Senate Seat. New York Times
See also:
Jackson, John S (August 2006). The Making of a Senator: Barack Obama and the 2004 Illinois Senate Race Occasional Paper of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute (Southern Illinois University).
Proposal
I propose restoring the February 21, 2009 pre-
Happyme22 sentence about the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate Democratic primary election and updating it, in
WP:Summary style, with important information and better, more authoritative sources from the
United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 subarticle:
In March 2004 he won an unexpected landslide victory with 53% of the vote in a seven-candidate field—29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival—in the most expensive U.S. Senate primary in history.[61]
61. Mendell, David (March 17, 2004). Obama routs Democratic foes; Ryan tops crowded GOP field; Hynes, Hull fall far short across state. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Fornek, Scott; Herguth, Robert C. (March 17, 2004). Obama defeats Hull's millions, Hynes' name; Consistent effort results in landslide for Hyde Parker. (paid archive). Chicago Sun-Times, p. 2.
Davey, Monica (March 18, 2004). As quickly as overnight, a Democratic star is born. The New York Times, p. A20.
Howlett, Debbie (March 19, 2004). Dems see a rising star in Illinois Senate candidate. USA Today, p. A04.
Mendell (2007), pp. 235–246.
Newross ( talk) 19:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Tad Lincoln and
Happyme22 are both apparently confused.
This topic is not about Obama's expected landslide victory over
Alan Keyes of
Maryland in the November 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate general election.
This topic is about Obama's unexpected landslide victory over seven candidates in the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate primary election.
It was Obama's unexpected landslide victory in the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate primary election that made him, literally overnight, a national political star and started speculation in major newspapers about his presidential prospects, and led to his selection less than four months later as the July 2004 Democratic National Convention keynote speaker.
Some pre-July 2004 DNC keynote address articles:
That Obama overcame better-known and better-funded opponents in the most expensive U.S. Senate primary in U.S. history is certainly more than "very trivial and truly adds nothing" but could be left in the
United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 subarticle.
Since the March 17, 2004 Chicago Sun-Times reference is a paid archive it can be left in the
United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 subarticle.
Revised proposal
In the March 2004 primary election, Obama won an unexpected landslide victory with 53% of the vote in a seven-candidate field, 29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival.[61]
61. Mendell, David (March 17, 2004). Obama routs Democratic foes; Ryan tops crowded GOP field; Hynes, Hull fall far short across state. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Davey, Monica (March 18, 2004). As quickly as overnight, a Democratic star is born. The New York Times, p. A20.
Howlett, Debbie (March 19, 2004). Dems see a rising star in Illinois Senate candidate. USA Today, p. A04.
Mendell (2007), pp. 235–246.
Newross ( talk) 17:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Um, can anyone explain why the info boxes at the top of the page were changed, what policy covers it, and if there is no policy that covers it, then where is the consensus for it? I ask because it looks far worse then before, the font is much smaller and it still does not really shorten the page. Brothejr ( talk) 10:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
question dealt with many times - see FAQ |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I am curious why Obama is listed as the "first African American" president. Should that be changed to "first half-African American" president, since he his half white (his mother and grandmother, who raised him, were white)? Thanks, Stusan ( talk) 23:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, news casters are technically wrong when they call him the first Black president, because in fact he isn't all black. The United States hasn't had a black president yet. (ie. Tiger Woods, Derek Jeter). 69.121.221.237 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC). That's silly. Almost no one in the United States is "all black." The vast majority of African Americans have mixed ancestry. If Obama isn't black, then neither is Wesley Snipes, Oprah Winfrey, Condi Rice, Michael Jordan, Martin Luther King, Al Sharpton, etc., etc. marbeh raglaim ( talk) 09:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC) |
A number of organizations that Obama was involved in or acted on the board of directors for don't have hyperlinks. Example, the Center for Neighborhood Technology. I think it would be beneficial to give people access to that kind of thing, and most of them have either their own webpages or wikipedia pages, so why not link to them? Unfortunately because of the (necessary) lock on the page, it's difficult to add those links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealintomorrow ( talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 21:35, 4 March 2009. I wonder how fast this comment will be censored. :) Wikipedia is really getting be be a joke! Unfortunately, this is a really great concept being more and more poorly executed! I'll guess I go back to using Google to find facts, because I just don't feel Wikipedia is unbiased anymore. If they can work with respond acurately and forcefully to http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91114 then maybe the reputation can be rescued. Otherwise, Wikipedia will probably become something of a joke similiar to the Washington Post, et al, along with the accompanying drop in users, readers, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.236.112.195 ( talk) 15:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't the one containing the {{reflist}} tag be called Notes per WP:CITE and for both consistency and accessibility. It does not make sense to have them both named the same thing. I didn't want to make the change without discussion. Calebrw ( talk) 05:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Does it really matter that he didn't graduate from there? He spent half his undergraduate career there. Why discount it just because it wasn't where he spent his final years? I don't think there's anything wrong with being inclusive here. Equazcion •✗/ C • 03:15, 7 Mar 2009 (UTC)
Obama spent two years each at Occidental and Colombia. They were both important to his education and both deserve mention in the infobox. I bet Occidental considers him enough of an alumnus to ask him for money. PhGustaf ( talk) 07:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 45 | ← | Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 |
I just took a look at the Recovery.gov copyright info page and it appears that all content on the site - even the content produced by third-party vendors - is either public domain or CC-BY. In particular there's a high-quality video on the front page that would be a great demonstration of Obama's oratory style. Might be other media to dig out of there too, for this article and for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act article. Dcoetzee 01:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I WOULD SUBMIT THAT INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IN THIS ARTICLE IS APPROPRIATE. IT IS ACCURATE, NEUTRAL, INTERESTING AND SUPPORTED BY FACTUAL REFERENCE. IT IS IN NO WAY OFFENSIVE, DEFAMATORY OR PROFANE.
It does not dispute his USA citizenship or his entitlement to be president based on birth. In fact the proposed footnote says "Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC."
USA law does not prohibit dual citizeship ( http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html). Supreme Court rulings in United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark (1898), Perkins v. Elg (1939), Mandoli v. Acheson, 344 U.S. 133 (1952), Kawakita v. U.S. (1952), Afroyim_v._Rusk 387 U.S. 253 (1967) and Vance v. Terrazas 444 U.S. 252 (1980), address citizenship.
Similar information is included in the William Henry Harrison article (and is usually included in any biography of President Harrison without controversy). It seems uncontroversal here as well.
The fact of the matter is that he held dual citizenship in the USA and the British Empire at birth. He lost the British citizenship on December 12, 1963 and became a citizen of Kenya. Thus from December 12, 1963 until August 4, 1982 he held dual citizenship in the USA and Kenya. He lost Kenyan citizenship on his 21st birthday.
Suggested Text:
Obama is the first President of the United States to have been born a British Citizen since William Henry Harrison.
Suggested footnote:
[2] When Barack Obama Jr. was born in 1961 Kenya was a British colony. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status and the citizenship of his children was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): "Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth." Therefore, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.
see also http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Overseas_citizen
Natwebb ( talk) 07:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
If there were a source that is more reliable and more to the point than those given, I think a brief mention of Obama's (possible) dual citizenship during his early life might be possible to include in "Early life". It's definitely not lead material or anything like that. But we need some sources that say this in clear, non-retracted, and factual manners... some WP:OR about what "must be true" is no good. LotLE× talk 08:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
The problem here is the old slippery slope. Analogous to the anti-abortion crowd who, having have failed to get abortion rights overturned outright, have gone pecking around the edges, proposing small bills to make things slightly more restrictive then build on that with more, etc... The citizenship conspiracy theorists, having failed utterly on the main front, are trying to slink in the side door, to try to establish that possessing dual citizenship can invalidate one from being a "natural-born citizen". What dual citizenship Obama may or may not have had...a citizenship lost at age 2 (British) and at then at age 21 (Kenyan)...is about as trivial as the left-handedness issue is. Summation; I cannot accept that this entry is being proposed in good faith. Bad faith does not automatically invalidate the proposed material, but that and the apparent trivial nature of the material is strike 1 and strike 2, IMO. Discussing the history of his birth and who his mother and father were is a natural part of history. Delving into the actually citizenship of any of the three is where ulterior motives here come into play. Tarc ( talk) 15:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Seems like a bit of trivia too obscure to be worth mentioning. - 137.222.114.243 ( talk) 17:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
← I'm with Tarc and Thuran on this. I find it hard to see this as anything other than an attempt to back-door bogus citizenship questions. In addition, this factoid has not been shown to have any relevance to the man's life and career, which is what this biography covers. We make decisions all the time about what goes in here or not - and I mean valid, verifiable, well-sourced points of interest - because of space and weight concerns, and we have left out many items from this biography for those reasons. This is trivia, and unless some relevance can be attached to how it affected his life, his thinking, his educational and career decisions, etc., and unless we have good sourcing for it, it doesn;t belong here. We don't even have a source that verifies that he even knew about this at his 21st birthday or any time later until perhaps the recent intense interest in his birthright. For example, does he talk in his memoir about deciding not to affirm Kenyan citizenship? Has he acknowledged this anywhere? Did it have any impact on his life whatsoever? Tvoz/ talk 10:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Under British law, he was a dual citizen. Since the USA does not abide by British law. The USA recognizes him as a Natural Born Citizen of Hawaii. It is a bit of interesting trivia that british law would regard him as a citizen until the early 80's, however since we go by US law in the US. It's not noteworthy. He was not born a British Citizen. He was born an American, seeing as how thats where he was born, in america. Had he been born in British governed land, then he'd be a British citizen. -- DemocraplypseNow ( talk) 18:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Citizenship laws are very complicated when it comes to dual nationals because often laws conflict and new born babies can't choose their citizenship. As I've understood it, US law has allowed for its citizens to hold dual nationality with no problems (although officials can be petty - British politician Boris Johnson was born in New York and once when travelling home from the USA with his family he was told he had to travel on a US passport - I think he's since renounced his US citizenship because of this). When Kenya became independent Obama's British citizenship transferred to Kenyan. Kenyan law does not allow for its adult citizens to be dual nationals - they have to renounce their foreign citizenship or lose their Kenyan citizenship on their twenty-first birthday. Kenyan law cannot take away US citizenship, only Kenyan and vice versa.
Obama was born a dual national - US by birth (and by his mother), British colonial as the son of his father, with the latter converting to Kenyan when he was 2. When he was a child each citizenship was held without any regard to the laws governing any other, as is standard. But because he failed to renounce his US citizenship by the time he was 21 (i.e. old enough to make a choice himself), his Kenyan citizenship automatically lapsed.
Now a lot of people around the world qualify for more than one citizenship - for example a lot of Australians qualify for at least one European Union country citizenship on the parent or grandparent rule and many will take out the relevant passport for ease of travel. And many national football teams have exploited the grandparent rule to sign up talented players from their diaspora - the Republic of Ireland team got a particular reputation for this a couple of decades ago. And one could go on. Most of the relevant articles don't cover this unless the individual in question has made use of it. Unless Obama ever actually made use of his non-US citizenships then the matter is utterly trivial and has no place here. Timrollpickering ( talk) 09:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Why is the lead so short all of a sudden? An article of this size should have 4 bulky paragraphs. — R 2 22:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Here's what I think might be a good layout of the lead:
LonelyMarble, just a quick comment, before too much of this inclusion fest gets fussed over or trimmed, according to my toolbox Page size stats, the article size is currently only 32 kB (5293 words) of readable prose. Thus, per the lead guideline, this size translates to only two or three lede paragraphs. Modocc ( talk) 03:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC) To anyone that wants to add the page size function to your toolbox, create a User:username/monobook.js page with the following added to it:
importScript('User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js'); //[[User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js]]
Your User:username/monobook.js page can be created by going to the Skins under your preferences, clicking on the monobook's Custom JS and saving the new page. -- Modocc ( talk) 05:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
He is multiracial. His mother was caucasion. See NNDB for details.fjw75@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.65.17 ( talk) 13:41, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
What sect of Christianity is Obama part of? I know that he used to be part of the United Church of Christ but right now it doesn't seem like he's really a part of any of them. Could someone elaborate on this? I know this might have been answered in the archives but I haven't a clue on which section it was. My President is Black ( talk) 04:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Note that in a recently archived discussion the contribution of a similar designation to the infobox was objected to for the professed (no pun intended) reason that it was unsourced (I think; it was hard to follow the objector's reasoning) -- so I've finally got around to adding " law school instructor ( Constitutional law)" with a note. It's interesting/useful IMO to mention politicians' academic occupations, those who've had them (eg Moynihan as a scholar in sociology, Gingrich as a historian/untenured history prof, etc.). ↜Just me, here, now … 17:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
User:Tvoz has now improved the phrasing and, rightly, also removed the footnote, since the assertion is already documented lower down in the article's text. I'd only included a ref to forstall another claim that it hadn't been documented adequately: In the archived thread I'd argued, "[A]s for [the contention] 'It's expected that prominent lawyers lecture' I hope upon reflection you'll admit this undocumented line of attack is a bit bizarre!" -- the response to which was, "[T]hat's funny considering you accused me of violating WP:OR after deleting your addition of unsourced content. You are the one with the bizarre thinking[...]." ↜Just me, here, now … 04:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Kauffner's latest repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits to an Obama-related article:
Kauffner's only other contributions to Obama-related articles have also been repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits to
The Audacity of Hope,
Dreams from My Father, and
Project Vote.
See:
Talk:The Audacity of Hope#Reception - repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits
Please immediately cease and desist making repeated inappropriate and disruptive edits to Obama-related Wikipedia articles. Newross ( talk) 23:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
is an exceptionally poor source because it completely omits the most basic information that a 'present' vote in the Illinois General Assembly—where a constitutional majority ( absolute majority) is required to pass a bill—is in effect a 'no' vote:Hernandez, Raymond; Drew, Christopher (December 20, 2007). It’s not just ‘ayes’ and ‘nays’: Obama’s votes in Illinois echo. The New York Times, p. A1.
basic information not omitted from articles by Illinois reporters who covered the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield for several years, [27] like: Dan Vock [28], Rick Pearson [29], Ray Long [30], and Chris Wills [31]:Mikva, Abner J. (February 16, 2008). 'Present' perfect. The New York Times, p. A19.
Zorn, Eric (September 9, 2008). Obama’s foes fire same old cheap shot. Chicago Tribune, p. 1 (Metro).
Newross ( talk) 07:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Newross ( talk) 19:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)Vock, Daniel C. (January 25, 2008). 'Present' votes defended by Ill. lawmakers. Stateline.org.
Pearson, Rick; Long, Ray (February 3, 2008). 'Present votes emerging from the past. Chicago Tribune, p. 13.
Wills, Christopher (Associated Press) (September 23, 2008). Parsing the political present tense.. USA Today.com.
I thought I'd notify some of the page regulars... The link about his smoking is broken. It was here but the url doesn't seem to work. I removed it and replaced it with a cn. -- Happyme22 ( talk) 04:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I never heard, that Barack Obama is german descent. His sister from Kenya lived many years in Germany and speak perfect German. 77.22.172.233 ( talk) 12:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
“ | Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review gained national media attention [1] and led to a publishing contract and advance for a book about race relations. [2] | ” |
ought to flow better
“ | Having been elected as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, Obama's volitive editorial focus upon black women in history made headlines and led to a publishing contract and advance for a book about race relations. [2] [3] | ” |
Harvard Law 1990
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Ottre 14:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I just removed some "material" about him being a british citizen. This is probably the usuall nonsense. If so, can somebody please delete this section as not being a forum or advise such and I will delete this myself, thanks in advance. -- Tom 17:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I think Wikidemon makes a really excellent point and analogy above. Who Britain may or may not consider a citizen is really of little weight to Obama's life, having never done anything to claim or utilize that citizenship to which he was (purportedly) eligible. The analogy with Israel is a good one here. Their laws give automatic citizenship to "Jews" (defined under a specific religious theory of what that means). Who would editors feel about adding to the Al Franken article that he "Has automatic Israeli citizenship" (even though he has no particular association or allegiance with that country)? It just wouldn't seem remotely relevant there. In any case, the citation for the British citizenship claim is a bit weak. We only have one source, which isn't a terrible one, but seems to be engaging in a bit of amature lawyering. If the British Government had made some official statement that Obama, specifically, was formerly a citizen, and sources reported that, it would be quite a bit stronger. But what we have is a source giving its own (not unreasonable, but not legally binding) interpretation of British (and Kenyan) law. Moreover, there aren't any wealth of other source rushing in to mention the importance of this same "fact". It doesn't add up to something currently worth including. LotLE× talk 05:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
There are two issues here which must both be addressed. First is notability, which is being debated above, but the more important issue is verifiability. We must keep in mind that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. The most recent restoration of this point is a series of breadcrumbs leading a reader on a path of original research, which is not appropriate for any Wikipedia article, much less a high-profile one. Even if we accept the breadcrumbs at face value, it's simply not enough, because the first reference is not independent, the second is a Wikipedia page, and the rest are citations of law which would require us as editors to be asserting that we are qualified to interpret applicable law, which we not only aren't qualified to do, but are not allowed to do under existing policy. This tidbit may be true, and it may be interesting...but it cannot be included in the article as it is currently written. Frank | talk 14:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
(Unindent) Also it may not be 100% clear that other Presidents in the interim weren't notionally British citizens under the parent and, I think, grandparent rules. Remember that it wasn't so well codified in the nineteenth century. It is amateur lawyering to retroactively apply the laws, especially if none of them ever availed themselves of any such entitlement. Timrollpickering ( talk) 23:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Collapsed due to WP:BLP and WP:FRINGE. Not even worth discussion. -- Bobblehead (rants) 23:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
As has been said previously, Wikipedia is not a place to discuss politics and your opinion of politics. The fact is that it has NOT been verified that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, and has not been verified in which hospital he was born in. This is what all those pending lawsuits concern. I move that the text claiming him to be born in Hawaii is invalid and should be removed until undeniable proof has been brought forward that he was born there. Do not point to the "Certification of live birth". That document has been proven by Dr. Ron Polarik to be a fraud. If Wikipedia truly exists to be a hub to receive factual information, only valid information that has been proved and is irreputable should be valid on this site. Tom, with all due respect, the concern about him being a citizen with inherited loyalty to the British Crown, and being a citizen to the jurisdiction to the Crown, is valid. To suggest otherwise would be an example of political views interfering with an article. Not putting such a thing on here is not a good execution of NPOV. Read right below the edit box. "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". Him being born in Hawaii in the hospital mentioned is not irreputable, and for all intents and purposes, and to remain pursuant to Wikipedia's policies, should be removed unless proven to be accurate verifiable. Refusal to do so would be to voluntarily break Wikipedia's Terms of Service. |
As "presidential" is not a proper adverb, the first letter shouldn't be capitalized. It's not capitalized elsewhere in the article, so, let's go for some stylistic consistency here with the subsections. -- Kudzu1 ( talk) 21:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but, is that actually his real name? It seems like vandalism to me (considering all the fake rumors about him being a terrorist), and I was about to revert it, when suddenly I saw that, in the edit history, several recognizable editors (clearly not vandals) made constructive edits to the article while ignoring the name. I would like to know whether this is vandalism or otherwise. Thanks in advance, Dogcowsaysmoof Talk Guestbook Barnstar Gallery Sandbox 00:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I reverted some apparently unnecessary changes by Bratz angel14. Most reliable sources refer to Obama's earlier occupation as a "lawyer", and not an "attorney"; moreover, shortening Hawaii to "HI" would confuse non-Americans. These are typical of the changes I reverted. -- Scjessey ( talk) 16:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Under "Family and personal life," it says: "in 2005 the family moved from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house"... no longer "their current"! Perhaps it should read "to a $1.6 million house"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.17.176 ( talk) 08:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
While on visit in a middle east country, a man approached the white house gate saying he needed to see Barack Obama(he really did not). When the security asked the man to step out of the car, a pistol was found in the back of his trunk. Sources: Despierta America (On Univision) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.86.77 ( talk) 21:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
. . .
aloha nui loa,
excuse my ignorance as an outsider, but was Obama born on Hawaii?
Or on Oahu?
Under American practice, it is quite normal to refer to the state name as a birthplace, e.g. Alaska, Alabama.
But in an encyclopaedic reference, should there be tighter reference in the introduction to his actual birth island?
Even if all that means is saying he was born on Oahu, Hawaii ? I note that the Wikipedia entry for Abraham Lincoln refers to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hodgenville,_Kentucky, not just Kentucky?
i mua,
jason
avaiki ( talk) 16:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
. . .
ps: please excuse my poor formatting - wikipedia confuses me, apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avaiki ( talk • contribs) 16:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
The article needs to mention Obama administration's strong stance against outsourcing and its possible consequences. The issue has already been covered extensively by international media [37] [38] [39]. -- 128.211.201.161 ( talk) 17:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
How Rezko should be included was THE most contentious issue in the history of this article. An (imperfect) compromise consensus was reached in mid-July 2008 (see Talk:Barack Obama/Archive 30#Rick's opinion). The consensus wording had remained completely unchanged for 7 months and the cited references had remained unchanged except for some pruning.
The consensus on wording and references was upset by an inaccurate, contentious February 9, 2009 edit by ChildofMidnight, a February 21, 2009 expansion by Happyme22, and a February 25, 2009 slight condensation by Wikidemon, the net result of which was a longer, less accurate, and more contentious Rezko section with an additional dated reference.
I attempted to restore the wording to the February 9, 2009 pre- ChildofMidnight 7-month-old consensus wording and references (except changing "their current $1.6 million house" to "a $1.6 million house" and changing "Rezko's indictment and subsequent conviction" to "Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction" for clarity), but my attempt to restore the consensus wording and references was reverted three and a half hours later by Tad Lincoln saying the "Rezko section had just been condensed prior to" my "unexplained reversion."
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood. The purchase of an adjacent lot and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer and friend Tony Rezko attracted media attention because of Rezko's indictment and subsequent conviction on political corruption charges unrelated to Obama.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, in 2005 the family moved from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood. The purchase of the property was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a major political contributor to Obama, who later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. The transaction attracted media attention because of Rezko's later indictment and subsequent conviction on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, in 2005 the family moved from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to their current $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood. The purchase of the property was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a major political contributor to Obama, who bought an undeveloped lot adjecent to the Obama property on the same day as Obama, and later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. The transaction attracted media attention because of Rezko's later indictment and subsequent conviction on political corruption charges for unrelated activities. Nonetheless, Obama later said that the deal was a "mistake on my part and I regret it."
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, where they lived until moving into the White House. The purchase transaction, which Obama called a "mistake" on his part, later attracted media attention because it was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a fundraiser and contributor to Obama's political campaigns, who bought an adjacent undeveloped lot on the same day. and later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. Rezko was later indicted and convicted on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, Chicago. The purchase of an adjacent lot and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer and friend Tony Rezko attracted media attention because of Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction on political corruption charges that were unrelated to Obama.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, where they lived until moving into the White House. The purchase transaction, which Obama called a "mistake" on his part, later attracted media attention because it was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a fundraiser and contributor to Obama's political campaigns, who bought an adjacent undeveloped lot on the same day. and later sold part of the adjacent lot to the Obamas. Rezko was later indicted and convicted on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, Chicago. The purchase of an adjacent lot and sale of part of it to Obama by the wife of developer and friend Tony Rezko attracted media attention because of Rezko's subsequent indictment and conviction on political corruption charges that were unrelated to Obama.
Concur
I concur with Wikidemon latest edit; I would consider adding "fundraiser" to the sentence, if there is consensus to do so:
developer and friend Tony Rezko → developer, friend and fundraiser Tony Rezko
Newross ( talk) 19:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
First off, I apologize, for I was unaware of the numerous discussions that have taken place regarding this issue. That said, I do feel that the version that I saw on the page before I changed it (apparently ChildofMidnight's version) glossed over one huge detail: that the transactions ocurred on the same day. We do not know the fine-print details, but it is nonetheless one of the most important aspects of the story.
So may I propose this compromise:
Applying the proceeds of a book deal, the family moved in 2005 from a Hyde Park, Chicago condominium to a $1.6 million house in neighboring Kenwood, where they lived until moving into the White House. The purchase transaction later attracted media attention because it was coordinated with Tony Rezko, a fundraiser and contributor to Obama's political campaigns, who bought an adjacent undeveloped lot on the same day and later sold part of the lot to the Obamas. Rezko was later indicted and convicted on political corruption charges for unrelated activities.
I took out the "mistake" part, because I think that is what may have been frusterating people. Looking at it from another perspective, I could see how it may add a little unnecessary weight to the passage. That said, it is only two sentences, and I don't see the above proposal as having a weight problem. I hope that this compromise will satisfy all parties.
I hope that my good friend Tvoz, of all people, will believe me when I say that this is not an attempt to slander Obama at all, whatsoever. He is my president now, I wish him well, and I hope he succeeds. But the Rezko deal was a major story and, like it or not, is apart of Barack Obama's biography and always will be. That is why it should be told, not excluding major details. I hope editors consider my words. Thanks in advance. Best, Happyme22 ( talk) 01:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
...is stale, given that Obama is now in office. What he said he would do if elected is kind of moot now that he is in office, right? That he seemed to change his position during the campaign on withdrawal from Iraq does not matter much compared to what he actually does. A quick look shows that half to three quarters of this section is surplus at this point, and could be replaced carefully by a discussion of his actual political positions as opposed to campaign posturing. Wikidemon ( talk) 08:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure there's plenty of precedent for this. Any "political positions" page for a currently active politician is going to be a work in progress. That doesn't mean it isn't useful. marbeh raglaim ( talk) 02:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Obama's unexpected landslide victory in the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate primary election:
Some of those voters may have been thinking what I'm thinking: that Obama has the potential to be the most significant political figure Illinois has sent to Washington since Abraham Lincoln. Even as I look at those words on the computer screen before me, I realize that seems a little outlandish. It takes in a lot of territory, maybe too much too soon. But that's an honest assessment.
If he is elected in November, Obama will immediately replace Colin Powell as the person most talked about to be the first African-American elected president of the United States. That's a heavy load to put on any 42-year-old. Everybody who goes to the U.S. Senate thinks he's going to be president someday. Obama is one of the handful who really could be. [40]
Partisans in Washington consider him a shooting star in the November elections. A few whisper about a presidential future. "He's the real deal," says Sen. Jon Corzine, D-N.J., chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. [42]
Wording
He won decisively in the March primary, dispatching the other six candidates easily, and winning more than 50 percent of the vote.
From a crowded field of seven candidates, Obama received over 52% of the vote in the March 16, 2006 primary, emerging well ahead of his Democratic rivals.
Obama received over 52% of the vote in the March 2004 primary, emerging 29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival.
He won the March primary with 52% of the vote.
In March 2004 he won a surprise landslide victory with 53% of the vote in a seven-candidate field—29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival—in the most expensive U.S. Senate primary in history.
He won the March primary with 52% of the vote.
References
17. Illinois Primary 2004: Primary Elections Results, Chicago Tribune
44. Davey, Monica (March 17, 2004). From Crowded Field, Democrats Choose State Legislator to Seek Senate Seat. New York Times
See also:
Jackson, John S (August 2006). The Making of a Senator: Barack Obama and the 2004 Illinois Senate Race Occasional Paper of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute (Southern Illinois University).
61. Mendell, David (March 17, 2004). Obama routs Democratic foes; Ryan tops crowded GOP field; Hynes, Hull fall far short across state. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Fornek, Scott; Herguth, Robert C. (March 17, 2004). Obama defeats Hull's millions, Hynes' name; Consistent effort results in landslide for Hyde Parker. (paid archive). Chicago Sun-Times, p. 2.
Davey, Monica (March 18, 2004). As quickly as overnight, a Democratic star is born. The New York Times, p. A20.
Howlett, Debbie (March 19, 2004). Dems see a rising star in Illinois Senate candidate. USA Today, p. A04.
Mendell (2007), pp. 235–246.
60. From Crowded Field, Democrats Choose State Legislator to Seek Senate Seat. New York Times
See also:
Jackson, John S (August 2006). The Making of a Senator: Barack Obama and the 2004 Illinois Senate Race Occasional Paper of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute (Southern Illinois University).
Proposal
I propose restoring the February 21, 2009 pre-
Happyme22 sentence about the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate Democratic primary election and updating it, in
WP:Summary style, with important information and better, more authoritative sources from the
United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 subarticle:
In March 2004 he won an unexpected landslide victory with 53% of the vote in a seven-candidate field—29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival—in the most expensive U.S. Senate primary in history.[61]
61. Mendell, David (March 17, 2004). Obama routs Democratic foes; Ryan tops crowded GOP field; Hynes, Hull fall far short across state. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Fornek, Scott; Herguth, Robert C. (March 17, 2004). Obama defeats Hull's millions, Hynes' name; Consistent effort results in landslide for Hyde Parker. (paid archive). Chicago Sun-Times, p. 2.
Davey, Monica (March 18, 2004). As quickly as overnight, a Democratic star is born. The New York Times, p. A20.
Howlett, Debbie (March 19, 2004). Dems see a rising star in Illinois Senate candidate. USA Today, p. A04.
Mendell (2007), pp. 235–246.
Newross ( talk) 19:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Tad Lincoln and
Happyme22 are both apparently confused.
This topic is not about Obama's expected landslide victory over
Alan Keyes of
Maryland in the November 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate general election.
This topic is about Obama's unexpected landslide victory over seven candidates in the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate primary election.
It was Obama's unexpected landslide victory in the March 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate primary election that made him, literally overnight, a national political star and started speculation in major newspapers about his presidential prospects, and led to his selection less than four months later as the July 2004 Democratic National Convention keynote speaker.
Some pre-July 2004 DNC keynote address articles:
That Obama overcame better-known and better-funded opponents in the most expensive U.S. Senate primary in U.S. history is certainly more than "very trivial and truly adds nothing" but could be left in the
United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 subarticle.
Since the March 17, 2004 Chicago Sun-Times reference is a paid archive it can be left in the
United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 subarticle.
Revised proposal
In the March 2004 primary election, Obama won an unexpected landslide victory with 53% of the vote in a seven-candidate field, 29% ahead of his nearest Democratic rival.[61]
61. Mendell, David (March 17, 2004). Obama routs Democratic foes; Ryan tops crowded GOP field; Hynes, Hull fall far short across state. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Davey, Monica (March 18, 2004). As quickly as overnight, a Democratic star is born. The New York Times, p. A20.
Howlett, Debbie (March 19, 2004). Dems see a rising star in Illinois Senate candidate. USA Today, p. A04.
Mendell (2007), pp. 235–246.
Newross ( talk) 17:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Um, can anyone explain why the info boxes at the top of the page were changed, what policy covers it, and if there is no policy that covers it, then where is the consensus for it? I ask because it looks far worse then before, the font is much smaller and it still does not really shorten the page. Brothejr ( talk) 10:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
question dealt with many times - see FAQ |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I am curious why Obama is listed as the "first African American" president. Should that be changed to "first half-African American" president, since he his half white (his mother and grandmother, who raised him, were white)? Thanks, Stusan ( talk) 23:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, news casters are technically wrong when they call him the first Black president, because in fact he isn't all black. The United States hasn't had a black president yet. (ie. Tiger Woods, Derek Jeter). 69.121.221.237 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC). That's silly. Almost no one in the United States is "all black." The vast majority of African Americans have mixed ancestry. If Obama isn't black, then neither is Wesley Snipes, Oprah Winfrey, Condi Rice, Michael Jordan, Martin Luther King, Al Sharpton, etc., etc. marbeh raglaim ( talk) 09:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC) |
A number of organizations that Obama was involved in or acted on the board of directors for don't have hyperlinks. Example, the Center for Neighborhood Technology. I think it would be beneficial to give people access to that kind of thing, and most of them have either their own webpages or wikipedia pages, so why not link to them? Unfortunately because of the (necessary) lock on the page, it's difficult to add those links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealintomorrow ( talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 21:35, 4 March 2009. I wonder how fast this comment will be censored. :) Wikipedia is really getting be be a joke! Unfortunately, this is a really great concept being more and more poorly executed! I'll guess I go back to using Google to find facts, because I just don't feel Wikipedia is unbiased anymore. If they can work with respond acurately and forcefully to http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91114 then maybe the reputation can be rescued. Otherwise, Wikipedia will probably become something of a joke similiar to the Washington Post, et al, along with the accompanying drop in users, readers, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.236.112.195 ( talk) 15:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't the one containing the {{reflist}} tag be called Notes per WP:CITE and for both consistency and accessibility. It does not make sense to have them both named the same thing. I didn't want to make the change without discussion. Calebrw ( talk) 05:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Does it really matter that he didn't graduate from there? He spent half his undergraduate career there. Why discount it just because it wasn't where he spent his final years? I don't think there's anything wrong with being inclusive here. Equazcion •✗/ C • 03:15, 7 Mar 2009 (UTC)
Obama spent two years each at Occidental and Colombia. They were both important to his education and both deserve mention in the infobox. I bet Occidental considers him enough of an alumnus to ask him for money. PhGustaf ( talk) 07:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)