![]() | 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 70 | Archive 71 | Archive 72 | Archive 73 | Archive 74 | Archive 75 | → | Archive 80 |
I whacked that segment out. It's not a matter for a concise biography, and is covered adequately in other articles. PhGustaf ( talk) 03:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I added an audio file for the Bin Laden death. This was reverted 41 minutes later. The file is 6.05 MB versus 31.68MB for the video. It is provided for the many readers on slow connections or who for whatever other reasons are unable to access the video. It is common to provide audio only alternative files and I think it is imperative for a file of this significance.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 06:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Obama is widely celebrated as the first gay president of the U.S. [1] [2] [3] [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petey Parrot ( talk • contribs)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
Actually according to: http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/pdf/08fringes.pdf. Obama was not one of the most liberal, he was the most liberal Senator for 2007. Could that change please be made. Rodchen ( talk) 12:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Any 'ranking' on being liberal or conservative is of course subjective. That is why one quotes those who do the ranking. But since the article quote and cites nationaljournal, then the article should at least site it correctly, and state that they ranked him as the most liberal senator in 2007. Please see the reference. One may disagree with the ranking, but the statement 'According to National Journal Obama was ranking the most liberal Senator in 2007' is a statement of fact. And to say 'According to National Journal Obama was one of the most liberal senators' is actually hidding part of the truth. Rodchen ( talk) 04:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
The placement of this disputed factoid as one of five sentences summing up his senate career gives it undue weight and I'm going to remove it on that basis. The place for a full discussion of the factoid - including Obama's comments disputing it which are absent from this section - is probably the Senate Career article and not this one unless the Senate section is greatly expanded. Gamaliel ( talk) 05:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I wonder if you think the same way about the sentence 'He enjoyed high popularity as senator with a 72% approval in Illinois' especially since the article is actually dealing with MN senators and not Obama. Rodchen ( talk) 15:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. Done. Rodchen ( talk) 04:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Obviously any objective observer would not consider Obama the most "liberal" Certainly people like Russ Feingold are considerably to the left of him. The word liberal does not really have a set meaning anyway. For Example, Is voting for a giant wall on the southern border conservative or liberal? However, it could still go in if worded properly. For instance: "The National Journal claimed that..." 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 07:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The Iraq section needs lots of work At minimum there needs to be mention that Obama intends to keep American military bases and troops in Iraq until beyond his term. I'm not as concerned with how the rhetoric is phrased or whether wikipedia is calling the war over (The previous American president also declared that "combat operatins were over in Iraq several years ago) just as long as its clear that our bases and troops are still there and not planning on leaving during Obama's term 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 08:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
There needs to be something about Obama's polices regarding the rebellion and subsequent clampdown in Bahrain. Obama has recently hosted the corwn prince of Bahrain and reaffirmed America's commitment to the Bahrainian regime and characterized the protesters as terrorists. There also needs to be mention of the large number of American military bases in the country. http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/white-house-affirms-relationship-bahrain-detentions-and-prosecutions-continue 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 08:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes it clearly says that Obama is supporting the the regime's crackdown on the rebels and protesters. This is not opinion up for debate, this is his official position 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 15:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
More on Bahrain: Obama gave them $200 million over the last 12 months to help protect the government from rebeliion http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/105771 ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 18:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
There needs to be something about Obama's policies in Yemen. Obama supports the regime in Yemen and is aiding in the government's crackdown of protesters/rebels with supplies and airstrikes http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/world/middleeast/09intel.html?_r=1 Mention of strikes aimed at killing Anwar Al-Awlaki might also be appropriate 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 08:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The article is about cooperation with the regime of Yemen to keep them in power against rebellion. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 15:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
It is about joint military operations between the US and Yemen against Rebels. You call them terrorists but that is POV. They are people trying to overthrow the government of Yemen. The traditional term for that is a rebel. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 18:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
The section on Israel needs a lot of work. Most importantly there needs to be something about his opposostion to United Nations recognition of Palestine as an independent state. Even going so far as to say he would actively stop such a recognition with a veto. He has also said that he would seek to maintain Israel's military advantage over the Palestinians http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rm/144753.htm. The way the article reads now gives the reader a completely false impression of Obama's position. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 07:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
What? Are you denying Obama says he will veto UN regognition of palestine? I take it then you don't know anything about the conflict and Obama's official position? Please don't try to edit the israel section then. As far as the article, yes it clearly says the militarty advantage stuff. Its in the headline of the official state department press release. Read it again. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 15:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I didn't think anyone could not have known about his official positon opposing UN recognition of Palestine. Yes there are many sources http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=224394 And yes the military advantage stuff is clearly in the headline of the official state department release 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 18:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Why would that information possibly need to be in this article, instead of in the Presidency of Barack Obama article? The Mark of the Beast ( talk) 22:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change a native from Honolulu,Hawaii TO Born in Honolulu, Hawaii
TheLibrarian64 ( talk) 21:05, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Not done - No reason to make this change, as the existing wording is fine. "A native of" means "born in".
Tvoz/
talk 21:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
← Hmm, I don't see it that way, PhGustaf - the phrase "Native Hawaiian" does have special meaning as a reference to the indigenous people of Hawaii, similar to "Native American", also a referent to the indigenous peoples. But saying "A native of Honolulu, Hawaii," to me means only that he was born in Honolulu, not that he is a "Native Hawaiian" in that indigenous-people sense. So to my ears, it is correct as it stands, "a native of Honolulu, Hawaii". (The "of" changes the meaning.) "I am a native of New York" doesn't make me an Algonquian. I don't think it's a big deal at all, but I do think as a featured article we want to keep the writing as good as possible, and if we can avoid repeating the word "born", it seems to me to be better writing. I won't go to the wall on this one though. Tvoz/ talk 01:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking about a list of lies article to be made to where it shows the list of confirmed and sourced lies Obama has stated. It could be helpful to many. • GunMetal Angel 02:47, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't think this discussion is going anywhere, and I believe it should be left alone. Phearson ( talk) 17:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
"Politicians routinely fail to follow up on what they campaigned on in the primaries",since this is true shouldn't after a while all presidential nominees know that it's true, meaning when they make a promise it is a lie since they are certain that they won't be able to fulfill them? How many times can people make the same "mistake" and not have it count? -- 24.94.251.19 ( talk) 10:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
The photo File:Obama and daughter Sasha 2006.jpg was recently and swiftly given a Wikipedia:CSD#F4 and is now simply a bare red link in the article. Does anybody remember its provenance — was it a fair use photo that simply didn't have the proper blurb filed for this admin, or do we have to find another pic? Abrazame ( talk) 05:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I read that it was deleted by Fastily because of "F4: Lack of licensing information". When it was uploaded, the uploader had pinned a "PD-USGov" template to it. The next day, Feydey added "di-no source" template. The person who uploaded it does not seem yet to have responded to this question about it, even though he or she has found time to make plenty of other edits since then. -- Hoary ( talk) 04:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
It is interesting that any mention's of Obama's teleprompter user are promptly deleted. Whether or not his use is significantly different does not matter when discussion of his teleprompter is widespread among the general public, as shown by comparing the Google queries for Obama+Teleprompter ( Obama teleprompter) and Bush+Teleprompter ( Bush teleprompter.) Omitting this popular topic of public reference to the president would do a disservice to Wikipedia's goal of being an informative encyclopedia for everyone just as much as omitting the false accusations of Fatty Arbuckle committing murder would from his article.
Cliff Racer ( talk) 13:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Then bring the issue to that article. I'm sure that the editors there will be happy to discuss whatever concerns you have about his dog (He has a dog?). Phearson ( talk) 19:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure you think it is valid, but unfortunately no one else does, and please do not instruct me on what I should or should not be doing. White House pets, from Socks to Checkers to Fala, have received enormous amounts of coverage over the years, so much so that they even have their own article, United States presidential pets. This is why "but other stuff exists!" is never a valid rationale around here; evaluate topics on their own merit, not in comparison to other stuff. Tarc ( talk) 19:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
This generated a major media event in whole of the world. Should be mentioned in the main article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.190.187 ( talk) 23:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Absolutely not appropriate here. Tvoz/ talk 03:22, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Critical comments made by Obama's opponents imply that he is the first President ever to use a Teleprompter and the first President ever to play golf. I have been unable to find definitive sources for those two "Firsts", however. Timothy Horrigan ( talk) 21:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Nothing but chain-letter rumors I guess. TMCk ( talk) 15:51, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Not sure why it is doing it but can someone please re-format the image of Operation Neptune Spear so it isn't in the 2012 re-election section and is sitting in the Bin Laden section where it belongs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bofum ( talk • contribs) 07:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Can someone explain why the Link FA template isn't at the top of the page? — WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 00:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
If the question is what happened to the FA star, it seems to have disappeared because too many templates are in use on this page and one more was added which knocked this one out. I moved up the FA template, which reinstated the star, but the overall issue should be addressed. I see that the Link FA template is there for about 6 other languages, but I am not an expert in the use of these templates, nor did I find the documentation particularly illuminating, So I can't answer that - but the FA star is back, and I think it's important that it remain visible. Tvoz/ talk 21:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
"His concession speech after the New Hampshire primary was set to music by independent artists as the music video "Yes We Can", which was viewed by 10 million people on YouTube in its first month and received a Daytime Emmy Award. In December 2008, Time magazine named Barack Obama as its Person of the Year for his historic candidacy and election, which it described as "the steady march of seemingly impossible accomplishments". should read "His concession speech after the New Hampshire primary was set to music by independent artists as was the music video "Yes We Can", which was viewed by 10 million people on YouTube in its first month and received a Daytime Emmy Award. In December 2008, Time magazine named Barack Obama as its Person of the Year for his historic candidacy and election, which it described as "the steady march of seemingly impossible accomplishments". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.138.24 ( talk) 17:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
START TREATY
This should be a separate paragraph on this page.
Collapsing unhelpful trolling |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Radical?Why is Barack Obama's ideology radical? Randnotell ( talk) 14:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC) Approval/DisapprovalShouldn't there be a section about public approval? We have one for George Bush, why not our current president? The current Gallop Poll shows him at 42% approve 50% disapprove. http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx -- 68.37.181.39 ( talk) 15:47, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Should the alma mater in the infobox say "Harvard Law School" or "Harvard University"?I would like to think that the infobox would detail the general university, and upon further reading of the article, the specific college of that university would be stated. If a person studied business at Cornell University, should their alma mater in their infobox be "Cornell University" or "Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management"? I'd like to know other peoples' thoughts on this. :) Grenadetoenails ( talk) 07:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
PresidencyObama will be the 44th president, but the 43rd man to hold the office. It all goes back to Grover Cleveland who was first elected president in 1884 but was defeated for re-election in 1888. Four years later, he ran for president again and won. He is the only president with two divided terms. After much debate, historians now recognize him as both the 22th and 24th President of the United States — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.2.116 ( talk) 04:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Youtube controversy, Yes We CanFrom the main article: "the music video "Yes We Can", which was viewed by 10 million people on YouTube in its first month[257] and received a Daytime Emmy Award." The problem is that the reference does not says it in this form: "The first, in which celebrities sing along to an Obama speech, has received over 10 million hits", and this does not mean that there are 10 million (different) people who watched this video. Because the same person can watch it multiple times and hence youtube count him/her multiple times. Furthermore in the Yes_We_Can article uses (I think) the correct term: "...the video had been watched a combined total of more than 22-million times among all of the postings." Moreover see the youtube's official support page http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en-GB&answer=154414 : "What is a view? A view occurs when a person watches your video."
Consequently my suggestion is that to replace the text by : "...which viewed 10 million times..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.42.240 ( talk) 20:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
SP: AAA->AA+See: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/08/06/credit.rating.reaction.cnn/index.html?hpt=hp_c1 It was like a political/economical earthquake in US, but still no word about this in the article. Could you be so kind as to tell me why? This would be good for it: Standard & Poor's has downgraded the U.S. from the top rank of AAA rating to AA+ for the first time in history.
Recentism is a poor excuse here. This is a globally important situation so due weight is a questionable reason as well. As I said earlier, this is not an attempt to blame Obama, but it is an important situation and is already historical in its context. Obama will be linked to it in some manner whether you like it or not.
Arzel (
talk) 14:50, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Probably in economy you are not very strong. To start with, from United States federal government credit rating downgrade, 2011: "A credit rating is issued by a credit rating agency. A credit rating assigned to U.S. sovereign debt is an expression of how likely the assigning credit agency thinks it is that the United States will pay back its debts. A credit rating assigned to U.S. sovereign debt also influences the interest rates the U.S. will have to pay on its debt; if its debtholders know the debt will be paid back, they do not have to price the chance of default into the interest rate. Some lenders also have contractual requirements only to hold debt above a certain credit rating." Seconldy from United States public debt: "Losing the AAA rating would likely mean higher interest rates and the sale of treasury bonds by entities required to hold AAA securities." To sum up the effect of the downgrading is longterm, one of them is that US will have to pay back more due to the higher interest rate.
There was also a warning from Moody's in June.
Own research?
Summary?The better question is, why did I move the summary paragraphs that were on top to the bottom?
|
See: http://icasualties.org/ I've thought to check out that page after reading about the deadliest day in Afghanistan: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/world/asia/07afghanistan.html?_r=1
Now under Obama 1101 US troops died in Afghanistan in less than 3 years, while under G. W. Bush this count is 630 in almost 8 years. I would say that this is an important/interesting fact. I have also found a good picture for the Afghan war section: http://www.indecisionforever.com/files/2009/10/barack-obama-coffin-salute.jpg For me it raises many red flags, that when a president leads two-three wars then there is no war picture. But we can see pictures with absolutely no value, Obama is on the grass, Obama is playing basketball etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.149.50 ( talk) 01:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Collapsing unhelpful trolling |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
As I alluded to in the edit summary, I reverted the last series of edits for two reasons:
-- Scjessey ( talk) 16:48, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
WP:LEAD: It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies. [emphasis added]
This article's a joke and a complete whitewash. There IS no criticism of Obama mentioned, and there has been MUCH of it about him and his policies in the real world. Just not here. For a man from Mars, or anyone not knowing anything about politics, they would think this guy is just the greatest thing to ever happen to America and the world. I'm again reminded of why I don't take anything at Wiki seriously when it involves politics. The bias to the left sticks out like a sore thumb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.62.49 ( talk) 08:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Somehow I doubt anything with the word "controversy" in it will ever be approved for this article. It has yet to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.48.181 ( talk) 09:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Repeating myself since it was removed last try, obviously any hint of controversy or anything else to suggest Obama doesn't walk on water and has made controversial moves will hurt the feelings of the keepers of the flame here. So it doesn't exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.48.156 ( talk) 07:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Apropos of Obama's First days (as prez), the article tells us that
Well, yes; but the first-days matter that's backed up by note 113 strikes me as a lot less significant than the year-after-year matter that's backed up by notes 114 to 116. There's a widely held perception that, wherever the fault for this may lie, the US under Obama is pretty much pursuing the policies set by the previous administration ("PATRIOT", extending tax cuts for the rich, etc). It's so widely held that at least one book ( Kabuki Democracy) assumes it and shows (or purports to show) that it isn't Obama's fault. Yet the section Cultural and political image, where this might belong, makes no mention of it. (This section does point readers to the article Public image of Barack Obama, but the latter seems limited to discussing mere soundbite fodder.)
I do realize that a large section of WP's readership are obsessed with such matters as religion (and need to be told that the man is Christian and not Muslim, and that it's this version of Christian rather than that one); and I don't object to the material about religion, or indeed that about (relative) youth, ethnic identity, etc etc, let alone the material about specific issues (Libya and so forth); but the bigger picture seems like something stuck iin 2009. Or what am I missing? -- Hoary ( talk) 10:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Last Thursday (August 11), User:Iamiyouareyou changed the pron file to have a non-English pronunciation for some reason (the edit summary was something to do with "not using English accent on a non-English name" or some borderline-racist nonsense like that). Now if I could figure out how to undo that and change it back to the American version that was there before I would, but I'm not well up with how the Commons works. Could somebody friendly fix this for me please? — 80.1.161.16 ( talk) 19:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
In the Family and personal life section, the article stated that Obama has seven half-siblings from his Kenyan father's family – six of them living – and a half-sister with whom he was raised, Maya Soetoro-Ng, the daughter of his mother and her Indonesian second husband.
Barack Obama actually has ten half-siblings, as itemized below.
(i) From Barack Obama Sr and Kezia Obama: Abon’go (Roy) Malik Obama (1958), Dr. Auma Obama (1960), Abo Obama (1968), Bernard Obama (1970)
(ii)From Barack Obama Sr and Ruth Baker: Mark Okoth Ndesandjo (1965), David Opiya Ndesandjo (1967)
(iii) From Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham: President Barack Obama II (1961)
(iv) From Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro: Maya Kassandra Soetoro (1970)
(v) From Barack Obama Sr. and Jael: George Hussein Onyango Obama (1982)
(vi) From Lolo Soetoro and Erna Kustina: Yusuf Aji Soetoro (1981), Rahayu Nurmaida Soetoro (1987)
Source: Presidential Candidates. Org
First ever post, so please excuse any procedural mistakes in making this request. Cheers
MishaKeats (
talk) 21:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
This is simply not notable, and we have also one much more important first in the article: "He is the first African American to hold the office."
Just checked, that for example in other US president's artilce's you don't list this minor fact: Bill Clinton the first who born in Arkansas, Richard Nixon in California, Jimmy Carter in Georgia, Ronald Reagan in Illinois etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.186.10 ( talk) 10:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Is there any way to reduce the amount of "blue" in the lead? Currently, approximately 50% (1065/2119) of characters (excluding spaces and the pronunciation of Obama's name, as well as hidden text and formatting such as [[
, ]]
and '''
) in the lead are part of a wikilink. The breakdown, by paragraph, is as follows:
This makes the lead more difficult to read and essentially buries useful links to relevant articles in a sea of blue.
-- Black Falcon ( talk) 19:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
There are a number of unintuitive piped links in the lead. I understand that their purpose is to minimize the amount of text, but "easter egg"-type links are not reader-friendly and are almost entirely meaningless in print versions of the article. The links which caught my attention are:
Link (as it appears) | Wikicode | Notes |
---|---|---|
first | [[List of African-American firsts|first]]
|
the text that follows is a link to African American |
Democratic primary | [[United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004#Democratic primary|Democratic primary]]
|
the preceeding text is "March 2004" |
keynote address at the Democratic National Convention | [[2004 Democratic National Convention keynote address|keynote address]] at the [[2004 Democratic National Convention|Democratic National Convention]]
|
the link to the 2004 DNC could be removed: e.g., " keynote address at the Democratic National Convention" |
gradually withdrew combat troops from Iraq | [[Withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq|gradually withdrew combat troops]] from [[Iraq War|Iraq]]
|
it seems unnecessary to link to Iraq War: e.g., "gradually withdrew combat troops from Iraq" |
Afghanistan | [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghanistan]]
|
Afghanistan is a separate article about the country |
kill | [[Death of Osama bin Laden|kill]]
|
-- Black Falcon ( talk) 19:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2011/08/almost-all-american-presidents-play_19.html
Probably add: "Barack Obama plays chess.". My wild guess that this can be more important/interesting than the fact his dog's name is Bo.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.46.127 ( talk) 14:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, everyone knows how historic it was that he was the first President of African American decent. But I think it's also just as interesting and noteworthy (though it doesn't get as much attention) that he was the first born outside the lower 48 United States (as would have McCain if he had won) and the first President born in the second half of the 20th century (they made a VERY big deal about Kennedy being the first born in the 20th century). I keep trying to add these in the intro but a few others are making excuses for deleting them. It's just so annoying trying to make contributions only for them to get zapped on some technicality. I can understand insisting on "reliable sources" if the entry is of a questionable or controversial nature or if it's something we're otherwise not sure about. But in my case, there is no real dispute that the above is true (Wikipedia is quite clear that common sense/common knowledge statements don't need sources). And if we can include in Jimmy Carter's article that he was the first born in a hospital, I don't see why we can't include the above. Estil ( talk) 20:02, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
I believe there are two separate issues here. Being born in the second half of the 20th century is not notable. Being the first to be born outside the continental United States is notable, as is Jimmy Carter being first to be born in a hospital and Bill Clinton being the first to be born after World War 2.
This article on U.S. President Barack Obama seems to be all in all quite good to me. However, the section "Foreign policy" does not contain anything on Obama´s political standings and actions toward general world politics, even towards Europe and Russia. Maybe even China, I don´t know now. And what about the world monetary problems of today? Other economic problems? Nowadays topics like first actions for 2012 election campaign? Well, there is a large field for new serious contributions. -- Zbrnajsem ( talk) 09:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
The first days section is very light, and ought to include more substance. I propose the Gitmo EO be included. The Administration itself stressed the importance of the three EOs it signed on January 22, 2009 as representing a clean break from the previous Administration. Considering that the critique of certain foreign and national security policies of the Bush Administration remain the same in substance in this Administration, the Guantanamo Bay Executive Order is quite notable. Here are some articles from when it happen that explain the context in which he signed them:
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order_1_detention-guantanamo-bay-torture?_s=PM:POLITICS http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7845585.stm
And here are some establishing the importance of the fact Guantanamo Bay remained open one year later despite the Executive Order:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/politics/main6129494.shtml http://pubrecord.org/politics/8687/president-obama-loses-guantanamo/
Oneinatrillion ( talk) 21:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Proposed text: "Libyan war ended with an estimated total killed on both sides including civilians: 20,000." (source for the number: 2011 Libyan civil war). But two more wars to go, war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not so bad from a Nobel Peace Prize winner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.151.142 ( talk) 13:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Closing to avoid attracting trolling -- Scjessey ( talk) 12:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I imagine this has been discussed innumerable times before but isn't "African-American" a bit vague and misleading a term to describe BO's ethnic background? Considering he is half white and half Kenyan, shouldn't the proper term to use be " mulatto"? - Red marquis ( talk) 03:28, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
My cousin has an African-American Dad and an Caucasian Mom and he is classified as Bi-Racial so what makes the President so different? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CEfirestone ( talk • contribs) 08:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC) I read your FAQ and its wrong,you cant take everything the media tells you serious.He is Bi-racial PERIOD. Preceding unsigned comment added by CEfirestone ( talk • contribs)08:46, 17 July 2011
Is there any consensus that he's "African American?" Literally, he's clearly multi-racial, since is mother was white. He wasn't born or raised in africa, and wasn't raised in a household influenced significantly be african culture (i.e., his african father left the household when he was a small child). People I know from africa laugh at the American label "african-american" - since people on the african continent do not consider the african continent as defining a culture or people. I'm not taking a poll/vote, but curious if there's any reasoned consensus on this subject. John2510 ( talk) 04:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I find this entire argument completely superfluous. The thing is, he is fairly dark skinned, therefore people of African decent can and will relate to him. This is regardless of what he decent "technically is" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.219.17.221 ( talk) 03:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Randnotell ( talk) 02:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC) I think his Census form choice and the analysis of it settles it at "African-American" or "Black." http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/04/nation/la-na-obama-census4-2010apr04 Oneinatrillion ( talk) 18:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC) Wow, I have never seen wikipedia drop the ball so far as this. Some very questionable arguments above. Let me ask this - so if Vanilla Ice said he identified himself as an African American would that be enough to warrant it as 'fact' and be included on wikipedia? Of course not. There is obviously a serious and disturbing history of classifying anyone who is not 100% white as whatever ethnic minority they perhaps appear to be. However that's not factual, and wikipedia as I understand it is based on verifiable information - not how an individual 'feels' or 'identifies' as. The president is clearly as much white as he is black, and to say otherwise is clearly reenforcing a double standard. If he went around saying he checked 'caucasian' there would be no way that wouldn't be heralded as completely insane. So why is it okay for him to ignore the white half and say he's 'black'? User:jtw — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.25.218.0 ( talk) 06:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
See: http://www.gallup.com/poll/148739/Obama-Approval-Drops-New-Low.aspx. This should be added to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.40.195 ( talk) 12:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
It is a new low, it's just a new low for Barakandroll.
Ought to be mentioned? Reading "First Days" it felt absent. Thoughts? Oneinatrillion ( talk) 18:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
The last sentence under the heading "Economic policy" reads as: "The compromise overcome opposition from some in both parties, and...". The word 'overcome' should be 'overcame'. W1 m2 ( talk) 21:53, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
I've found: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_were_Barack_Obama's_grades_in_college Probably it is worthy to add it: "Barack Obama has not released transcripts for his grades from Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law. He has also not released his SAT and LSAT scores. No explanation has been offered for not releasing them." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.148.241 ( talk) 16:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Well said, Frank - exactly right. Tvoz/ talk 00:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
In which subarticle are places named after Obama mentioned? I found a school in Dallas, Texas named after him: http://www.dallasisd.org/obama WhisperToMe ( talk) 01:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Just wondering, Why is it that some famous biracil African Americans, like Tiger Woods and Barack Obama are only noted in for being African American and not biracial. That in my opinion is not reporting history correctly. I believe that is what the biracial term means. Mlt Mlt1963 ( talk) 03:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The speech on the American Jobs Act should be mentioned in the 2012 presidential campaign section as it is widely regarded as the kick off for his campaign. FranklinDObama ( talk) 09:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
rename this article Barack Obama remove the Hussein from his name in the article cannot bear to read that Muslim name being associated with him. Mranderson56 ( talk) 06:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Lots of articles of great leaders are there on Wikipedia where the middle name is not even mentioned.why cant the same thing be done here.i really dont want history to remember him as Barack Hussein Obama but as Barack Obama.please remove the Hussein it is my request to you.please beg of you to remove the middle name man its unbearable. Mranderson56 ( talk) 04:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
In foreign policy section there is a picture with the following text: "President Obama featured on a billboard with Ghana President John Atta Mills. In Ghana, like many African countries, Obama is very popular." This is clearly in wrong section, I don't see the connection between Obama's foreign policy and a billboard picture in Ghana. Moreover the text for me seems original resource, because it gives no reference for that Obama is very popular in Ghana. Furthermore for me it is not surprising how you manipulate the picture's text here. This picture can be found in two other wikipedia page, and let's see their text:
Do you see my problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.189.154 ( talk) 21:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Have a look at: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/01/politics/obama-lgbt/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
my suggestion for the article: "The president currently supports same-sex civil unions". I don't remember for such a strong support of gays from any US president. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.45.165 ( talk) 15:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Have a look at: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/09/21/barack-obama-troy-davis-martin-luther-king/
The latest case, Obama has not saved the innocent Troy Davis from the death penalty, and killed yesterday. Moreover from the article, which I think should be suitable for our article: "He has supported the rebels as they lynched black men in Libya. He has lent his full support to Mahmoud Jibril, the rebel leader, who has approved the commission of genocide against the black Tawergha of Libya. And he has pursued a war, based on propaganda, which is killing civilians daily in Liby." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.147.196 ( talk) 10:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I have an edit request to add the more prominent nicknames of Obama into the sidebar like his most common "No drama-bama" Kentpaulgta ( talk) 23:04, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Well considering there is a page that already displays this, You'd think you could add considering it is valid information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Drama_Obama#Barack_Obama — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentpaulgta ( talk • contribs) 01:30, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
If there's a page that has this info, why does it have to be doubled here, given the article is very long already? (magicmulder) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.82.64.222 ( talk) 11:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
From the 3rd paragraph: "Several events brought him to national attention during the campaign, including his victory in the March 2004 Illinois Democratic primary for the Senate election and his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in July 2004."
Without any source that it was a national attention. Furthermore note that he was an Illinois Senator for 8 years, so it is hard to say that he was unknown.
And this is also: "He was a community organizer in Chicago before earning his law degree. He worked as a civil rights attorney in Chicago and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004."
I believe it is true, but for lots of non-US residents this is not known fact. So for them it would be great to add a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.46.158 ( talk) 21:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Could someone looks at how the templates are set up at the bottom of this page please? The issue is that there are links instead of templates down there. I've not seen anything like it before, and I am not sure how to fix it. Thank you in advance. Backtable Speak to me concerning my deeds. 07:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I saw this at WP:VPT, and can offer a technical fix, but it is not without its own problems. Essentially, I have substituted a large number of templates, so that they are no longer transcluded. You can see the result at User:NSH001/sandbox 2.
The technique is to use Special:Expand templates to substitute some of the citation templates - in this case, those placed as list-defined references in the "Notes" section. This process is NOT straightforward - Special:Expand templates won't expand templates within <ref> ... </ref> tags, so the ref tags have to be edited first, then Special:Expand templates applied, then the tags edited back again, then the wikitext finally pasted back into the article (I used an external text editor to edit the ref tags).
The advantages are that fewer templates are now transcluded, so the limits are no longer breached, and the page will load a little faster.
The disadvantages are the difficulty of future maintenance: firstly any global changes made to the citation templates will no longer be reflected in the article; secondly it becomes much harder to edit these citations (it might even be necessary to maintain a separate subpage (probably of this talk page) to hold the un-substituted version of the templates).
Because of these disadvantages, I have not made any changes to the article. Instead, I think it should be discussed here first. If you decide to use it, all that's needed is to copy/paste the wikitext from the "Notes" section of my sandbox version over the corresponding wikitext in the mainspace article.
My own view is that this should be regarded as a temporary fix only. This is a Featured Article, so it can and should be trimmed, either deleting material altogether, or moving it to appropriate "Main" articles.
-- NSH001 ( talk) 15:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
This is inaccurate. He is the only one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.4.70 ( talk) 14:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Well first of all he is Biracial, even though I know he identifies as African American, the beginning of the article should at least state he is the first president of African American descent or first president of Irish/African descent. Educatedlady ( talk) 06:48, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Worth to include say: "Observers have said the U.S. President's hair has changed colour dramatically because of the pressures of the job since he assumed office two years ago." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.185.42 ( talk) 12:59, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Today I added the sentence, "On October 21, 2011 President Obama announced that all U.S. troops would leave Iraq in time to be, 'home for the holidays.' [200]" but I'm having trouble doing the footnote correctly as it's my first one, and I'm not very good at understanding the directions in the tutorial. Could someone please check the reference and tell me if I need to do anything differently. Carmaskid ( talk) 04:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
The following sentence does not make sense and is incorrect, as written: "Before Adm. Mike Mullen, now Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had visited Israel for over a decade, but in 2010 he made two trips, bringing his total to four.[207]"
The information in the original source that was cited, reads, "Meanwhile, visits by the Israeli and American military brass have jumped dramatically. Since becoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 2007, Adm. Michael Mullen has made four visits to Israel, two of them this year alone. Before Adm. Mullen, no chairman of the joint chiefs had visited Israel for over a decade."
I suggest the text would better read, "Adm. Mike Mullen, current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has made four trips to Israel since 2007, two of them in 2010. Prior to that time no Chairman of the Joint Chiefs had done so for over ten years." Since I cannot make the edit, I would appreciate it if an administrator did so. ( talk) 07:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
This is the Obama article, not the Mullen article. Likewise, mention of the death of some old governor (forgot his name) wouldn't be included because that old governor has nothing to do with Obama. BAMP ( talk) 14:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Just thought I'd bring this to your attention, Obama is in fact, not the 44th, but the 43rd President of the United States, as Grover Cleveland held the position twice non-consecutively. 124.184.247.174 ( talk) 11:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Best solution is to have a footnote. BAMP ( talk) 14:18, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
I have been told that this article is on article probation.
That means you need to discuss changes. If you do not, that may be vandalism. Anyone can revert vandalism. To do so is helping Wikipedia. Please don't vandalize!
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hi Balloon Boy ( talk • contribs) 03:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
This article seems like it is just a bunch of pieces mixed together. It is very disjointed and the selection of what appears is not comprehensive. It could be a result of political supporters or opponents crafting together an article. The percentage of online people supporting him is slightly greater so that affects the article.
There should be entirely new people reviewing this article because the people who wrote it probably put a lot of time into it but the product is not good. I am not going to be a reviewer except to choose one paragraph.
The paragraph
As president, Obama signed economic stimulus legislation in the form of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February 2009 and the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act in December 2010. Other domestic policy initiatives include the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act and the Budget Control Act of 2011. In foreign policy, he gradually withdrew combat troops from Iraq, increased troop levels in Afghanistan, signed the New START arms control treaty with Russia, ordered enforcement of the UN-sanctioned no-fly zone over Libya, and ordered the military operation that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. In April 2011, Obama declared his intention to seek re-election in the 2012 presidential election.[4]
The critique
This is in the introduction. It is just a selection of laws that people have selected. Some of them are not really Obama related, only happened to be President. This is because some of them were not his campaigning. If we use that measure, then the Lady Gaga article could have mention of some of these bills (just kidding).
My advice is to work on one paragraph every two weeks and really see if you need it. Start with the first paragraph.
With this sample paragraph, listing these bills looks like an ad. One way to fix it would be to see what are Obama's major accomplishments. They are the stimulus bill (don't need to have those fancy bill names as they are now chosen because of politics), Obama's health care.
Another way to fix it Another way to fix it would be to have a new committee of people who have never written about Obama and have them craft an article. Then compare and contrast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hood River ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Yet another way, probably better is to step back and pick 4 paragraphs to do an introduction.
paragraph 1: general introduction as the 44th President, African American, Democrat, etc.
paragraph 2: Previous background as Hawaii, Indonesia, etc. College where. After college and law school. Illinois Senate, US Senate.
paragraph 3: Very broad Presidential summary. Term marred by recession, had stimulus, Obama health care, possible loss of House due to Obama health care. Not a lot of law mentioned here.
paragraph 4: Other things, like author, Nobel Prize, but certainly not the 2010 Siena College poll (which shouldn't even be in the main article...why is it even there!) Hood River ( talk) 05:32, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Wikidemon's assessment that the article is a scatterbrained list of presidentials events. Voting is silly because then it will reflect his popularity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demonwiki2 ( talk • contribs) 01:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC) Some ideas mentionedd are good in theory. There should not be a laundry list of bills that President Obama signed. I removed a few trivial ones, trivial in the sense that President Obama did not campaign hard for these bills, did not make it an issue. If we let a lot of less relevant stuff be in the article, soon it will be an article about "The World during Barack Obama's Presidency", not "Barack Obama".
Here is what I removed:
The first bill signed into law by Obama was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, relaxing the statute of limitations for equal-pay lawsuits. [1] Five days later, he signed the reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover an additional 4 million children currently uninsured. [2]
On October 8, 2009, Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, a measure that expands the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. [3] [4]
On March 30, 2010, Obama signed the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, a reconciliation bill which ends the process of the federal government giving subsidies to private banks to give out federally insured loans, increases the Pell Grant scholarship award, and makes changes to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. [5] [6]
If you don't agree, cite where Obama was a key driving factor in these laws or cite articles where he made it a big deal. Issues that Obama made a big deal include closing Gitmo and the stimulus packages. Hi Balloon Boy ( talk) 02:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
The removal of the hate crime paragraph makes sense because Obama did not make it a big issue about hate crimes. The Ledbetter part some people may want since it was the first, but not really a notable first. So hate crimes, no, Ledbetter, maybe if enough people really want it. Sorry, HBB you win some, lose some. Same to Scjessey...please both of you get along. BAMP ( talk) 14:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Balloon Boy, I'd be careful acting like you have a moral high ground when it comes to disruptive behavior in the form of accusatory language. Remember that you have thrown many accusations against other editors in this conversation yourself, including a false claim of criminal behavior. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 14:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Note: This issue is being discussed at WP:ANI at the moment. -- Scjessey ( talk) 14:36, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree with II and Scjessey. The act may be something that women like but it is not a major part of Obama's history. Therefore, it doesn't belong in the article. BAMP ( talk) 16:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
This article is poorly written. The trouble is that a few people defend the status quo.
Let's take one section, Israel.
That section poorly defines Obama's biography in relationship to Israel. It mentions strong support and the missile system.
Off the top of my head, if there is an Israel section (does it need to be there?) then the spat with Netanyahu is relevant as well as settlements. Obama's trying to stop Gaza from being a member might be another issue.
Basically, the selection of issues is lop sided. It seems that one Wall Street Journal source is used to justify the content.
There should be consensus to include Israel. After there is consensus, there should be consensus to what to include. Baring any consensus, nothing on Israel should be included, not the status quo. My vote is that some things be included, not a total removal of the section. BAMP ( talk) 18:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
On January 25, 2011, in his 2011 State of the Union Address, President Obama focused strongly on the themes of education and innovation, stressing the importance of innovation economics in working to make the United States more competitive globally. Among other plans and goals, Obama spoke of a enacting a five-year freeze in domestic spending, eliminating tax breaks for oil companies and tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans, banning congressional earmarks, and reducing healthcare costs. Looking to the future, Obama promised that by 2015, the United States would have 1 million electric vehicles on the road and by 2035, clean-energy sources would be providing 80 percent of U.S. electricity.
There have been many, many State of the Union addresses. Most of forgettable.
Focus strongly? That is opinion.
Importance of innovation economics? That is rehashing the speech.
Weathiest Americans is just campaign speech.
On January 25, 2011, Obama delivered his yearly State of the Union Address. The speech included ideas on education and to make the United States more competitive globally. He proposed a five-year freeze in domestic spending, eliminating tax breaks for oil companies and increasing the top tax bracket (commonly called "Bush tax cuts" which were extended in a 2010 deal), banning congressional earmarks. Obama promised that by 2015, the United States would have 1 million electric vehicles on the road and by 2035, clean-energy sources would be providing 80 percent of U.S. electricity. Hi Balloon Boy ( talk) 14:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: "If Martin Luther King were alive today I believe that would remind us that unemployed people have a right to condemn the arrogance of Wall Street without demonizing all those who work there.", said U.S. President Barack Obama at the opening of the National Memorial Center dedicated to M. L. King in Washington, according The Guardian. The question for discussion is: Did Obama hit the King`s dream? Perhaps is to early to say so, but I think it`s the best way. For this thesis I have three strong argument: Obama is the first African American President of the United States, he was and still is fighting for peace in the world, and capitalism with a human face. 78.2.49.135 ( talk) 04:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
It seems the Israel section needs some revision to reflect Obama's policy positions. Right now it reads that he supports a "two state solution", and while I am sure he has said those words in his speeches, that is not his policy. He officially opposes recognizing Palestine as an independent state and officially opposes allowing them a vote at the United Nations, unless they agree to various hardline conditions such has agreeing never to have an army and not having a right of return. No such conditions are put on recognizing Israel an an independent state. 97.91.176.159 ( talk) 00:08, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Ok so we have a source. but your are still not changing the article. There is infact no mention of his opposition to a Palestinian state at all. And it actually tries to imply the opposite, saying that he is for a two stzte solution, which is clearly not the case, He only recognizies Israel, not Palestine as a state. 15:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.176.159 ( talk)
I was under the impression that the correct wording is "As [b]P[/b]resident, Obama administered over..." etc. This article uses "As [b]p[/b]resident, Obama administered over..." etc. Are we sure this is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.47.150.42 ( talk) 00:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Despite the FAQ Q4, the "II" is incorrect because
I understand that this is a featured article but there is always room to fine tune any written piece, and sometimes it is helpful to have new eyes look at it. The following is an outline of this article as it currently exists.
Barack Obama
I have read this article multiple times, recently. I think that it ends discordantly. All the personal information belongs together. I'm not quite sure about the appropriate placement for the section on cultural and political image, as I need to go back and read that section again. It might make a good transition between the sections on personal and professional life. I left it at the end of the list for the present. IMHO, the following reorginazation would increase the readability of the article. The new outline would be similar to the following:
Barack Obama
In the Domestic arena section we might consider adding information on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and something about Political opposition as, historically, that factor is germane to any president's legacy. If that were added, the 2010 midterm elections should be included there.
I have read the discussion on length and citations and if the article needs to be split, what would be included here under "Presidency?" I'm willing to do the reorganizing if doing so is agreed upon. I could work on it in my sandbox. Also, is there a standard guideline telling what basic sections to include in the biography of a living person? (Guess I'll go look for that after I post this.) Thoughts and comments? Carmaskid ( talk) 07:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of current and ongoing scandals involving the whitehouse, namely Solyndra and Fast and Furious? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.159.149 ( talk) 21:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I posted this on Dr.K.'s talk page, but he/she refused to just offer this there and insisted I bring here so the experts could weight in. Anyway, I'm just curious, I might have missed something but why did he/she remove that from this article, I personally didn't like the section title but the section itself seemed well sourced with reliable sources. Maybe you can offer up some clarification. Thanks. CRRays Head90 | We Believe! 03:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
[redacted]
Obama's Civil Rights Law practice is something he was particularly proud of, and historically will position him as a president, but it is a curious omission that absolutely no mention is made of it in this encyclopedia entry? (see video of excerpted interview below at 2:10 below)
"(I) started my Civil Rights Practice representing women and minorities- workers who had been discriminated against on the job" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b91nsPDQFUk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.236.186.178 ( talk) 16:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Seems clear to me that the infobox should not include his position as a Senate subcommittee chair - we use the infobox to highlight major positions held, and subcommittee chair does not rise to the level of notability of State Senator, US Senator, and President. It's appropriately in the text, but in order to keep the infobox useful, it's best to keep it streamlined and as uncluttered as possible. I removed it from the infobox - any disagreement? Tvoz/ talk 03:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
We've had this many times. see FAQ. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||||
Just wanted to point out that Obama isn't African-American. African-American refers to the people whose descendants were traded in the slave trade, mostly in West Africa. His mother is white and born in the states. His father is black and was born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii. Obama has no claims to african-american heritage. Rather, he is Kenyan-American. He is black, but not african-american. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.17.184.254 ( talk) 03:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Its factually incorrect. His racial makeup is clear. Outer skin color does not define race. He is Bi-Racial or if you prefer mixed race. He is not black nor is he white. Saying he is african-american any usage of the term. Yes it is important to correct such fallacies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.68.88 ( talk) 06:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Apparently feel good slogans and not fact. The article perpetuates a lie and does a disservice to reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.68.88 ( talk) 23:51, 29 November 2011 (UTC) What is listed as his race is misleading.
Prose qualityThere are a lot of paragraphs that begin with the phrase "On [date], [year], ...". There are also a lot of paragraphs that are only one or two sentences long. Could we not change this to make the prose more professional and engaging to read? 138.38.59.78 ( talk) 16:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Stable version
Obama isn't "african-american"I invite everyone to go to the Wikipedia page African-American. The definition, with sources and all, clearly states that African-Americans "are citizens or residents of the United States who have at least partial ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa and are the direct descendants of enslaved Africans within the boundaries of the present United States.". It is a widely published fact that his father migrated to Hawaii from Kenya. Obama is not a "direct descendant of enslaved Africans" and therefore cannot be considered and African-American.-- Jacksoncw ( talk) 19:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
First African American PresidentNo he is not. He was not born in Africa. He was born in Hawaii, so at least he should be called the first Hawaiian President. That is well documented, but yet you still continue to call him 'African'. He is not. He is of mixed race-mulatto, is the term. His father was from Africa-not this man. His white mother-from Kansas. It seems that this is ignored. If your going to have facts-state them correctly. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aircarrier ( talk • contribs) 13:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
|
I know this may sound a bit mad, but stick with me.....
As the top of the talk page points out, this article has been cited by no fewer than fourteen different media organisations. Big ones, too: CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Daily Telegraph, etc. etc. Doesn't that then mean that there are sufficiently enough non-trival mentions from reliable sources that we could theoretically write a Wikipedia article about this Wikipedia article? I'm sure that I've seen articles get passed through WP:N with considerably fewer sources on their subjects... I know it might seem like quite an odd thing for an encyclopedia for write an article about, but let's not forget that we also have an article about buttered cats. 86.168.92.16 ( talk) 03:27, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
From the most recent Obama video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyjkVAgRFRk you can see that the president has got too bright white color teeth, see also the shape and the structure of the teeth. For me it suggests that he has got only denture. It should be good for the article if somebody could obtain an official medical report of the president's teeth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.188.14 ( talk) 12:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
no idea where the "bias" is. For everything else, see FAQ Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Shouldn't he just be "American" What is African about President Obama? He was born in Hawaii right? So he's American. I understand it is socially wrong to be racist against any race except whites, and it is always okay to be bias and for any other race especially that of African descent, but really, this is Wikipedia. Isn't Wikipedia supposed to be unbias and fair? If I am a black man and I am married to a white woman, and I have a child, that child is not "black" or African American, that child is mixed race, and if that child is born in America, he or she is "American" One is African American if he or she was born in and came from Africa to become American. Please, put aside your anti-white racist bias ways, stop preaching for unbias ideas while doing bias things, walk the walk if you are going to talk the talk, and be fair. If you don't, I hope someone with the money to sues Wikipedia for allowing this bias trash to continue. President Obama is not black, he is not African American, he is mixed race and he is American. use logic instead of social brainwashing to write your articles. 50.47.145.163 ( talk) 08:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC) |
The following discussion 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.
I think we need to be careful. Some of the attempts to argue this are a bit silly, but the hidden discussion above is a telling one. The USA is far more concerned with racial issues than many countries, certainly more than mine, so it demands racial descriptors, where other countries may not even bother with them. African American is the current politically correct alternative to the now totally unacceptable Negro or nigger. In its own way, it's no less racist. It's just the current nice way of describing the same people. While not being as diplomatic as he may have been, the poster in that now hidden discussion was saying that he would prefer everyone to be just called American, rather than having racial labels. I tend to agree with him.
His post may have looked like one of not understanding. I think he understood very well.
Rather than simply jumping on these posters and hiding or deleting their comments, a little engagement may go a long way. HiLo48 ( talk) 21:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Obama Signed NDAA. Should be mentioned in the article.-- 76.31.238.174 ( talk) 05:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I noticed that a hidden category was added to this article placing it to the Article Feedback 5 Additional Articles. While on the face of it, it seems innocent and also worth while. However, this article sees a lot of people looking to push their POV into it. This is one of the main reasons why it is semi-protected and also is on article probation. This sort of feedback mechanism on this specific page will most assuredly be gamed by those very same people wanting to push their POV. Consequently, feedback from that survey would be tainted by responders bias and would be considered unreliable or not truly representative of the entire Wikipedia reader community. 74.79.34.29 ( talk) 11:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
How is it that controversy and criticism hardly appear in this article. This president has one of the most extreme policy agendas and is largely devoid of any substance. If the purpose of Wikipedia articles is for a fair and balanced picture (NPOV) I think a bit more attention to the alternate points of view on this president should be included. See George W. Bush's article and search for "criti" or "controv" and you'll find a much more complete record. 70.26.39.203 ( talk) 04:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, let's start with criticisms of his health care plan, the handling of the assassination of Bin Laden, and military strikes in 3 countries without congressional approval.
174.52.9.91 (
talk) 04:39, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Unless I am missing something in the article, it's not as though there are praises of the man put in there either. By which I mean I don't see anything like "many claimed x policy to be the greatest thing ever." I definitely could see notable reactions, positive or negative, to specific policy initiatives in the sub article about his presidency. I could even see strictly factual information such as popular opinion polls about a particular issue, but even then I would tend to think that should be on the article about his presidency not his biography. Bottom line, whatever is added should be verifiable facts and not opinions (whether they be the editors' opinions or quoting another person's opinion). For instance, verifiable information that a particular policy had a particular result (be it negative or positive) would be acceptable, but a pundit or blog simply saying "this policy sucks" would not be acceptable. Jdlund ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC).
Several other recent Presidents have a separate heading in their article for judicial appointments. I would suggest pulling out the Sotomayor and Kagan appointments from the "Domestic policy" section and putting them in their own section (perhaps with additional information on appointments to lower courts). — DavidConrad ( talk) 14:06, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion 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.
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request this line be edited: "Barack Hussein Obama II (Listeni/bəˈrɑːk huːˈseɪn oʊˈbɑːmə/; born August 4, 1961) is the 44th and current President of the United States. He is the first African American to hold the office.
Barack Hussein Obama's mother was white, and his father was African American (black)
The correct terminology is "Mulatto" So, it should read that he is the first Mulatto to hold the office. Mixed or Bi-Racial is also acceptable, Bi-Racial preferred.
His mother was white, why is obama's white heritage not reported?? According to your own Wiki, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulatto This is the definition of obama's racial background. So to be correct and accurate, obama's true race should be input into the wiki, not denying one race or the other.
Ghostsouls ( talk) 05:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
WP:FORUM; bring sources, then come back Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
As far as his personal image, there are some terms that he brought into widespread use. This is a good addition. Think hard. I can think of some of them. They include shellacking and teachable moment. Neither term was used until Obama used them. There are a few more. There are also some events during his Presidency that are really not part of his biography. These should be trimmed. Anything that he was not a major proponent and waged a major public campaign for is potentially good material. The other stuff is not and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midemer ( talk • contribs) 06:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC) The Section mentioning the Death of Osama Bin Laden should be edited to just say that he announced the death and not orchestrated or anything to that effect. Our Fine Military killed Osama and not by the order of barrak. If any president deserves this in their Bio its George W. Bush. Since he originally ordered his acquisition. ( Sirbiff10 ( talk) 03:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)) |
WP:FORUM. We go by published sources. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Romney was criticized for using the term severely conservative. Nobody uses that term. Some suggest he is a fake conservative and was trying to overcompensate. Likewise, some Obama supporters (but not me) try to go overboard and insist he is Christian because of the previous controversy. However, Christians do not call themselves that except to foreigners who can't speak English. Christians call themselves Catholic or Methodist, etc. Other politician's articles use United Church of Christ in the box. It is also possible that opponents of Obama want Christianity in the box to highlight the un-natural use of the word. Again, why not UCC? Also Obama did not denounce the UCC. He only resigned from being a deacon or a member of the particular congregation. As such, I am fixing the infobox. Midemer ( talk) 06:36, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Ask someone what their religion is? They say "Baptist" or "Catholic". Ask them in a foreign country and they might say "Christian". But I realize there are many anti-Obama people who want to cast doubt on Obama so they use "christian" as his religion, not United Church of Christ. Since there are 120 million people against Obama in the U.S. out of 300 million, you're never going to win that argument even if you are right. Midemer ( talk) 01:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
|
WP:FORUM; bring those sources you think exist, then come back Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Inbreeding is when a college department faculty got their degrees from there. After a while, there is no new ideas, just preaching to the choir. I fear this has happened to the Obama article. The same old people say no, no, no, and chase people away. I have read the summary of the article. Some of it is ok but some of it suffers from inbreeding. There are some points which shouldn't be there. For example, McCain is just an old man and an obscure person. Look at President James Madison. He ran against DeWitt Clinton. The President is not defined by the man he ran against. Instead, look at the most important things of Obama. Draw up a list of the 10 most important things and all of those must be included. One of the 10 things is that he is President, is American, and was Senator. I will fix things. Midemer ( talk) 02:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Tromping over to the talk page to claim "inbreeding" is exactly the opposite of the WP:FIVE pillars that are the foundation of Wikipedia. If you have suggestions to improve the article; please feel free to make them. That is much more constructive - and much more likely to result in improvements to the article - than your recent attempts to make changes without WP:CONSENSUS. (Posting on the talk page and then making a fairly large change shortly thereafter does not constitute consensus.) Frank | talk 03:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC) In addition, the gratuitous assertion of inbreeding is highly unlikely to be viewed as representing collegial editing tendencies. Frank | talk 03:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
According to Politico, Barack Obama cited that his favorite animal was the egret, a type of white heron. I think that this is an important addition as it may give school children a research topic.
Sources: - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72167.html - In dreams of my father, Obama describes seeing an egret for the first time with his father and he states "[egrets] embody [the] spiritual freedom ... of the formerly subdued" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.28.186.30 ( talk) 02:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
The title Gaddafi is better because intervention ended with Gaddafi's death, and most intervention consisted of targeting Gaddafi. Its also been discussed here. Pass a Method talk 08:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is an excellent review of events in the President's life. But I wonder; what is the man like? Some may say this is not encyclopedic content, but peeking at the page of the famously moral Cato the Younger reveals this opening paragraph:
Marcus Porcius Cato Uticensis (95 BC, Rome – April 46 BC, Utica), commonly known as Cato the Younger (Cato Minor) to distinguish him from his great-grandfather (Cato the Elder), was a politician and statesman in the late Roman Republic, and a follower of the Stoic philosophy. A noted orator, he is remembered for his stubbornness and tenacity (especially in his lengthy conflict with Julius Caesar), as well as his immunity to bribes, his moral integrity, and his famous distaste for the ubiquitous corruption of the period.
Since we can include personality and character traits of long-passed historical figures, I vote that we do the same for modern historical figures. TheThomas ( talk) 16:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Is part of his family from Brazil ? Please dame la pija ( talk) 21:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Please dame la pija ( talk) 21:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
This image comes from his campaign website and is a selective snapshot of favourable data which does not represent the expert consensus of the broader community. It should be removed 207.216.253.134 ( talk) 22:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Someone added this graph to the article – is this appropriate? It seems like a fairly selective bit of data, given the obvious shortcomings of the unemployment figure itself (which only charts benefit recipients, not long-term unemployed), and it goes against WP:SYNTH to imply that Obama is responsible for the unemployment figure. We could just as easily do the DJIA or GDP or number of private- vs. public-sector jobs created, but none of these really tell the whole story. — Designate ( talk) 19:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
This article has been removed from the category "American Christians" and been placed in the "African-American Christians" category. I understand that the former category is the parent of the latter, but the appearance is that Wikipedia believes that Blacks need to be segregated from the other American Christians. I suggest leaving Black Americans, including President Obama, in the American Christians category even though they are also in their own Christian category. Alternatively, merge the African-American Christians category into the American Christians category. SMP0328. ( talk) 03:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Arpaio on Thursday unveiled preliminary results of an investigation, conducted by members of his volunteer cold-case posse, into the authenticity of President Barack Obama’s birth certificate, a controversy that has been widely debunked but which remains alive in the eyes of some conservatives.
At a news conference, Arpaio said the probe revealed that there was probable cause to believe Obama’s long-form birth certificate released by the White House in April is a computer-generated forgery. He also said the selective service card completed by Obama in 1980 in Hawaii also was most likely a forgery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.135.204 ( talk) 18:55, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
If there is ever proof or widespread coverage, then it should be in the article. Until then, it is a joke. Everyone can see the computer generated form is recent. Nobody says it is 50 years old. But in the 1960's, air travel was rare so Obama couldn't have jetted to Kenya and back. It's just silly. He was born in Hawaii. McCain was born in Panama. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
The link to President Obama's speech announcing Osama Bin Laden's death seems a bit large. Someone should decrease its size. It's located in the Foreign policy section I would do it, but I don't know how. SMP0328. ( talk) 17:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I came across this article The Road We've Traveled and found blantant vandalism that needed to be reverted. Regardless of how you feel about the film, the article could use some improvement and some monitoring from experienced editors. Remember ( talk) 18:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
I found this buried in the archives. It is recent so it is really bad that someone is hiding it there. I accuse nobody though, just fixing it, copying it here for discussion and change. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the ideas of 1. close Gitmo 2. limiting salary to $500k to bailout banks 3. stimulus package 4. Obama health care 5. Speech to Egyptians 6. Afghanistan troop surge followed by a pull out starting 2 years later.
I also add that Obama is against making a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline because it pits his union supporters (for) against his Greenpeace supporters (against). Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I've added a few details and removed a few unnecessary details from the intro. If you disagree, please discuss it. Don't just remove it. Thank you. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Osama Bin Laden was attacked and killed in May, however the attack was planned in April. The section of the intro should be clarified, because it gives an incorrect statement on his actual death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick.metcalfe ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Obama is currently categorized as being Irish, Kenyan, Scottish, Swiss, and Welsh. How many of those are correct? SMP0328. ( talk) 16:00, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Alright, was the honorary degree given or taken back? http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/16/us-usa-catholics-contraception-idUSTRE81F12620120216
Twillisjr ( talk) 21:17, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
As far as his personal image, there are some terms that he brought into widespread use.
This is a good addition. Think hard. I can think of some of them. They include shellacking and teachable moment. Neither term was used until Obama used them. There are a few more.
There are also some events during his Presidency that are really not part of his biography. These should be trimmed. Anything that he was not a major proponent and waged a major public campaign for is potentially good material. The other stuff is not and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midemer (talk • contribs) 06:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
The Section mentioning the Death of Osama Bin Laden should be edited to just say that he announced the death and not orchestrated or anything to that effect. Our Fine Military killed Osama and not by the order of barrak. If any president deserves this in their Bio its George W. Bush. Since he originally ordered his acquisition. (Sirbiff10 (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC))
This is a good comment. Yet someone censored this and shoved it to the archives. If I was not curious, it would remain there. I am copying it here.
I fully agree that this article has a lot about his presidency unrelated to his biography. Part of it may be political opinion pushers trying to manipulate Wikipedia.
The terms shellacking and teachable moment should be included. Let's think of some other Obama-ism. These are important details of the biography of Obama. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:06, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
Barack Obama is our first Mulatto president. 69.124.93.51 ( talk) 00:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
|
discussed many times -see archives and article text and notes
|
---|
The source says his title was "Senior Lecturer." Why aren't we using his actual job title instead of some fluffed up title he gave himself? Is it wikipedia policy to simply give people achievements when they declare they have them rather than going by the evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.64 ( talk) 23:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
They could call him "Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer," but the actual job title they gave him was "Senior Lecturer." Any particular reason why his actual job title isn't being used? Leading people on to believe he has an advanced degree in law is blatantly dishonest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.64 ( talk) 06:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
No I do not "own" the article, but if I could look at the histories of some people then I bet I'd see strong evidence that you think you do. I just read the "professor" article on the US, and they show lecturers as being distinct from professors. They also make clear the distinction between capital letter "Professor" and the lower-case informal "professor" and in this case the latter applies to Obama, but the former is the one actually used in the article, which is more evidence of intentional lying to promote Obama. I assume this is because the professor article states that a real professor has more prestige than a mere lecturer. It seems like you aren't actually reading my arguments and your mind was made up before I even posted so I'm not sure why I'm bothering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.64 ( talk) 16:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
This conversation is an absurd re-tread which has been had several dozen times before - see the archives. What article are you reading? Where do you see "Professor" in upper case as his job title? For quite a long time we have had "professor" in lower case in the infobox as a descriptive term, we say he "taught Constitutional Law" (which I know because I came up with the wording almost four years ago) and we give his title as Senior Lecturer in the text. This non-existent, and still pathetic, controversy is incredibly well-sourced as a sop to the idiotic complaints of anti-Obama trolls, which this is once again. Please, let's move on to the next idiocy. Tvoz/ talk 05:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
|
This article is massive, with the current version running to over 193 kilobytes. WP:SIZERULE says that a page of 100+ kilobytes "Almost certainly should be divided". Why isn't more material being split out to subarticles? Nyttend backup ( talk) 07:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
There should be a section that describes the presidents drug abuse including cocaine marajuana and addiction to nicotine inthe form of cigarretes and drug chewing gum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.129.218 ( talk) 02:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Read the twenty ird source. Also read this http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-struggles-smoking-addiction-praises-congress-new-tobacco-regulations/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.129.218 ( talk) 02:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
"Asked if the president still smoked, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama has "a struggle with nicotine addiction" every day.
Obama has a long history of smoking and a photo emerged of him during the campaign trail smoking as far back as college. During the presidential campaign, he chewed nicorette chewing gum in an effort to kick the habit. Gibbs said he "assumed" the president still chewed the nicorette. The president dodged questions at the start of his administration about whether he was still lighting up.
Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-struggles-smoking-addiction-praises-congress-new-tobacco-regulations/#ixzz1qHYJuott" — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
129.2.129.218 (
talk) 02:56, 27 March 2012 (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 70 | Archive 71 | Archive 72 | Archive 73 | Archive 74 | Archive 75 | → | Archive 80 |
I whacked that segment out. It's not a matter for a concise biography, and is covered adequately in other articles. PhGustaf ( talk) 03:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I added an audio file for the Bin Laden death. This was reverted 41 minutes later. The file is 6.05 MB versus 31.68MB for the video. It is provided for the many readers on slow connections or who for whatever other reasons are unable to access the video. It is common to provide audio only alternative files and I think it is imperative for a file of this significance.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 06:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Obama is widely celebrated as the first gay president of the U.S. [1] [2] [3] [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petey Parrot ( talk • contribs)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
Actually according to: http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/pdf/08fringes.pdf. Obama was not one of the most liberal, he was the most liberal Senator for 2007. Could that change please be made. Rodchen ( talk) 12:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Any 'ranking' on being liberal or conservative is of course subjective. That is why one quotes those who do the ranking. But since the article quote and cites nationaljournal, then the article should at least site it correctly, and state that they ranked him as the most liberal senator in 2007. Please see the reference. One may disagree with the ranking, but the statement 'According to National Journal Obama was ranking the most liberal Senator in 2007' is a statement of fact. And to say 'According to National Journal Obama was one of the most liberal senators' is actually hidding part of the truth. Rodchen ( talk) 04:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
The placement of this disputed factoid as one of five sentences summing up his senate career gives it undue weight and I'm going to remove it on that basis. The place for a full discussion of the factoid - including Obama's comments disputing it which are absent from this section - is probably the Senate Career article and not this one unless the Senate section is greatly expanded. Gamaliel ( talk) 05:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I wonder if you think the same way about the sentence 'He enjoyed high popularity as senator with a 72% approval in Illinois' especially since the article is actually dealing with MN senators and not Obama. Rodchen ( talk) 15:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. Done. Rodchen ( talk) 04:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Obviously any objective observer would not consider Obama the most "liberal" Certainly people like Russ Feingold are considerably to the left of him. The word liberal does not really have a set meaning anyway. For Example, Is voting for a giant wall on the southern border conservative or liberal? However, it could still go in if worded properly. For instance: "The National Journal claimed that..." 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 07:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The Iraq section needs lots of work At minimum there needs to be mention that Obama intends to keep American military bases and troops in Iraq until beyond his term. I'm not as concerned with how the rhetoric is phrased or whether wikipedia is calling the war over (The previous American president also declared that "combat operatins were over in Iraq several years ago) just as long as its clear that our bases and troops are still there and not planning on leaving during Obama's term 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 08:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
There needs to be something about Obama's polices regarding the rebellion and subsequent clampdown in Bahrain. Obama has recently hosted the corwn prince of Bahrain and reaffirmed America's commitment to the Bahrainian regime and characterized the protesters as terrorists. There also needs to be mention of the large number of American military bases in the country. http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/white-house-affirms-relationship-bahrain-detentions-and-prosecutions-continue 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 08:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes it clearly says that Obama is supporting the the regime's crackdown on the rebels and protesters. This is not opinion up for debate, this is his official position 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 15:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
More on Bahrain: Obama gave them $200 million over the last 12 months to help protect the government from rebeliion http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/105771 ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 18:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
There needs to be something about Obama's policies in Yemen. Obama supports the regime in Yemen and is aiding in the government's crackdown of protesters/rebels with supplies and airstrikes http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/world/middleeast/09intel.html?_r=1 Mention of strikes aimed at killing Anwar Al-Awlaki might also be appropriate 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 08:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The article is about cooperation with the regime of Yemen to keep them in power against rebellion. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 15:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
It is about joint military operations between the US and Yemen against Rebels. You call them terrorists but that is POV. They are people trying to overthrow the government of Yemen. The traditional term for that is a rebel. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 18:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
The section on Israel needs a lot of work. Most importantly there needs to be something about his opposostion to United Nations recognition of Palestine as an independent state. Even going so far as to say he would actively stop such a recognition with a veto. He has also said that he would seek to maintain Israel's military advantage over the Palestinians http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rm/144753.htm. The way the article reads now gives the reader a completely false impression of Obama's position. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 07:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
What? Are you denying Obama says he will veto UN regognition of palestine? I take it then you don't know anything about the conflict and Obama's official position? Please don't try to edit the israel section then. As far as the article, yes it clearly says the militarty advantage stuff. Its in the headline of the official state department press release. Read it again. 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 15:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I didn't think anyone could not have known about his official positon opposing UN recognition of Palestine. Yes there are many sources http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=224394 And yes the military advantage stuff is clearly in the headline of the official state department release 68.188.25.170 ( talk) 18:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Why would that information possibly need to be in this article, instead of in the Presidency of Barack Obama article? The Mark of the Beast ( talk) 22:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change a native from Honolulu,Hawaii TO Born in Honolulu, Hawaii
TheLibrarian64 ( talk) 21:05, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Not done - No reason to make this change, as the existing wording is fine. "A native of" means "born in".
Tvoz/
talk 21:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
← Hmm, I don't see it that way, PhGustaf - the phrase "Native Hawaiian" does have special meaning as a reference to the indigenous people of Hawaii, similar to "Native American", also a referent to the indigenous peoples. But saying "A native of Honolulu, Hawaii," to me means only that he was born in Honolulu, not that he is a "Native Hawaiian" in that indigenous-people sense. So to my ears, it is correct as it stands, "a native of Honolulu, Hawaii". (The "of" changes the meaning.) "I am a native of New York" doesn't make me an Algonquian. I don't think it's a big deal at all, but I do think as a featured article we want to keep the writing as good as possible, and if we can avoid repeating the word "born", it seems to me to be better writing. I won't go to the wall on this one though. Tvoz/ talk 01:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking about a list of lies article to be made to where it shows the list of confirmed and sourced lies Obama has stated. It could be helpful to many. • GunMetal Angel 02:47, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't think this discussion is going anywhere, and I believe it should be left alone. Phearson ( talk) 17:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
"Politicians routinely fail to follow up on what they campaigned on in the primaries",since this is true shouldn't after a while all presidential nominees know that it's true, meaning when they make a promise it is a lie since they are certain that they won't be able to fulfill them? How many times can people make the same "mistake" and not have it count? -- 24.94.251.19 ( talk) 10:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
The photo File:Obama and daughter Sasha 2006.jpg was recently and swiftly given a Wikipedia:CSD#F4 and is now simply a bare red link in the article. Does anybody remember its provenance — was it a fair use photo that simply didn't have the proper blurb filed for this admin, or do we have to find another pic? Abrazame ( talk) 05:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I read that it was deleted by Fastily because of "F4: Lack of licensing information". When it was uploaded, the uploader had pinned a "PD-USGov" template to it. The next day, Feydey added "di-no source" template. The person who uploaded it does not seem yet to have responded to this question about it, even though he or she has found time to make plenty of other edits since then. -- Hoary ( talk) 04:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
It is interesting that any mention's of Obama's teleprompter user are promptly deleted. Whether or not his use is significantly different does not matter when discussion of his teleprompter is widespread among the general public, as shown by comparing the Google queries for Obama+Teleprompter ( Obama teleprompter) and Bush+Teleprompter ( Bush teleprompter.) Omitting this popular topic of public reference to the president would do a disservice to Wikipedia's goal of being an informative encyclopedia for everyone just as much as omitting the false accusations of Fatty Arbuckle committing murder would from his article.
Cliff Racer ( talk) 13:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Then bring the issue to that article. I'm sure that the editors there will be happy to discuss whatever concerns you have about his dog (He has a dog?). Phearson ( talk) 19:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure you think it is valid, but unfortunately no one else does, and please do not instruct me on what I should or should not be doing. White House pets, from Socks to Checkers to Fala, have received enormous amounts of coverage over the years, so much so that they even have their own article, United States presidential pets. This is why "but other stuff exists!" is never a valid rationale around here; evaluate topics on their own merit, not in comparison to other stuff. Tarc ( talk) 19:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
This generated a major media event in whole of the world. Should be mentioned in the main article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.190.187 ( talk) 23:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Absolutely not appropriate here. Tvoz/ talk 03:22, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Critical comments made by Obama's opponents imply that he is the first President ever to use a Teleprompter and the first President ever to play golf. I have been unable to find definitive sources for those two "Firsts", however. Timothy Horrigan ( talk) 21:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Nothing but chain-letter rumors I guess. TMCk ( talk) 15:51, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Not sure why it is doing it but can someone please re-format the image of Operation Neptune Spear so it isn't in the 2012 re-election section and is sitting in the Bin Laden section where it belongs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bofum ( talk • contribs) 07:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Can someone explain why the Link FA template isn't at the top of the page? — WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 00:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
If the question is what happened to the FA star, it seems to have disappeared because too many templates are in use on this page and one more was added which knocked this one out. I moved up the FA template, which reinstated the star, but the overall issue should be addressed. I see that the Link FA template is there for about 6 other languages, but I am not an expert in the use of these templates, nor did I find the documentation particularly illuminating, So I can't answer that - but the FA star is back, and I think it's important that it remain visible. Tvoz/ talk 21:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
"His concession speech after the New Hampshire primary was set to music by independent artists as the music video "Yes We Can", which was viewed by 10 million people on YouTube in its first month and received a Daytime Emmy Award. In December 2008, Time magazine named Barack Obama as its Person of the Year for his historic candidacy and election, which it described as "the steady march of seemingly impossible accomplishments". should read "His concession speech after the New Hampshire primary was set to music by independent artists as was the music video "Yes We Can", which was viewed by 10 million people on YouTube in its first month and received a Daytime Emmy Award. In December 2008, Time magazine named Barack Obama as its Person of the Year for his historic candidacy and election, which it described as "the steady march of seemingly impossible accomplishments". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.138.24 ( talk) 17:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
START TREATY
This should be a separate paragraph on this page.
Collapsing unhelpful trolling |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Radical?Why is Barack Obama's ideology radical? Randnotell ( talk) 14:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC) Approval/DisapprovalShouldn't there be a section about public approval? We have one for George Bush, why not our current president? The current Gallop Poll shows him at 42% approve 50% disapprove. http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx -- 68.37.181.39 ( talk) 15:47, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Should the alma mater in the infobox say "Harvard Law School" or "Harvard University"?I would like to think that the infobox would detail the general university, and upon further reading of the article, the specific college of that university would be stated. If a person studied business at Cornell University, should their alma mater in their infobox be "Cornell University" or "Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management"? I'd like to know other peoples' thoughts on this. :) Grenadetoenails ( talk) 07:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
PresidencyObama will be the 44th president, but the 43rd man to hold the office. It all goes back to Grover Cleveland who was first elected president in 1884 but was defeated for re-election in 1888. Four years later, he ran for president again and won. He is the only president with two divided terms. After much debate, historians now recognize him as both the 22th and 24th President of the United States — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.2.116 ( talk) 04:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Youtube controversy, Yes We CanFrom the main article: "the music video "Yes We Can", which was viewed by 10 million people on YouTube in its first month[257] and received a Daytime Emmy Award." The problem is that the reference does not says it in this form: "The first, in which celebrities sing along to an Obama speech, has received over 10 million hits", and this does not mean that there are 10 million (different) people who watched this video. Because the same person can watch it multiple times and hence youtube count him/her multiple times. Furthermore in the Yes_We_Can article uses (I think) the correct term: "...the video had been watched a combined total of more than 22-million times among all of the postings." Moreover see the youtube's official support page http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en-GB&answer=154414 : "What is a view? A view occurs when a person watches your video."
Consequently my suggestion is that to replace the text by : "...which viewed 10 million times..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.42.240 ( talk) 20:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
SP: AAA->AA+See: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/08/06/credit.rating.reaction.cnn/index.html?hpt=hp_c1 It was like a political/economical earthquake in US, but still no word about this in the article. Could you be so kind as to tell me why? This would be good for it: Standard & Poor's has downgraded the U.S. from the top rank of AAA rating to AA+ for the first time in history.
Recentism is a poor excuse here. This is a globally important situation so due weight is a questionable reason as well. As I said earlier, this is not an attempt to blame Obama, but it is an important situation and is already historical in its context. Obama will be linked to it in some manner whether you like it or not.
Arzel (
talk) 14:50, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Probably in economy you are not very strong. To start with, from United States federal government credit rating downgrade, 2011: "A credit rating is issued by a credit rating agency. A credit rating assigned to U.S. sovereign debt is an expression of how likely the assigning credit agency thinks it is that the United States will pay back its debts. A credit rating assigned to U.S. sovereign debt also influences the interest rates the U.S. will have to pay on its debt; if its debtholders know the debt will be paid back, they do not have to price the chance of default into the interest rate. Some lenders also have contractual requirements only to hold debt above a certain credit rating." Seconldy from United States public debt: "Losing the AAA rating would likely mean higher interest rates and the sale of treasury bonds by entities required to hold AAA securities." To sum up the effect of the downgrading is longterm, one of them is that US will have to pay back more due to the higher interest rate.
There was also a warning from Moody's in June.
Own research?
Summary?The better question is, why did I move the summary paragraphs that were on top to the bottom?
|
See: http://icasualties.org/ I've thought to check out that page after reading about the deadliest day in Afghanistan: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/world/asia/07afghanistan.html?_r=1
Now under Obama 1101 US troops died in Afghanistan in less than 3 years, while under G. W. Bush this count is 630 in almost 8 years. I would say that this is an important/interesting fact. I have also found a good picture for the Afghan war section: http://www.indecisionforever.com/files/2009/10/barack-obama-coffin-salute.jpg For me it raises many red flags, that when a president leads two-three wars then there is no war picture. But we can see pictures with absolutely no value, Obama is on the grass, Obama is playing basketball etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.149.50 ( talk) 01:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Collapsing unhelpful trolling |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
As I alluded to in the edit summary, I reverted the last series of edits for two reasons:
-- Scjessey ( talk) 16:48, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
WP:LEAD: It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies. [emphasis added]
This article's a joke and a complete whitewash. There IS no criticism of Obama mentioned, and there has been MUCH of it about him and his policies in the real world. Just not here. For a man from Mars, or anyone not knowing anything about politics, they would think this guy is just the greatest thing to ever happen to America and the world. I'm again reminded of why I don't take anything at Wiki seriously when it involves politics. The bias to the left sticks out like a sore thumb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.62.49 ( talk) 08:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Somehow I doubt anything with the word "controversy" in it will ever be approved for this article. It has yet to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.48.181 ( talk) 09:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Repeating myself since it was removed last try, obviously any hint of controversy or anything else to suggest Obama doesn't walk on water and has made controversial moves will hurt the feelings of the keepers of the flame here. So it doesn't exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.48.156 ( talk) 07:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Apropos of Obama's First days (as prez), the article tells us that
Well, yes; but the first-days matter that's backed up by note 113 strikes me as a lot less significant than the year-after-year matter that's backed up by notes 114 to 116. There's a widely held perception that, wherever the fault for this may lie, the US under Obama is pretty much pursuing the policies set by the previous administration ("PATRIOT", extending tax cuts for the rich, etc). It's so widely held that at least one book ( Kabuki Democracy) assumes it and shows (or purports to show) that it isn't Obama's fault. Yet the section Cultural and political image, where this might belong, makes no mention of it. (This section does point readers to the article Public image of Barack Obama, but the latter seems limited to discussing mere soundbite fodder.)
I do realize that a large section of WP's readership are obsessed with such matters as religion (and need to be told that the man is Christian and not Muslim, and that it's this version of Christian rather than that one); and I don't object to the material about religion, or indeed that about (relative) youth, ethnic identity, etc etc, let alone the material about specific issues (Libya and so forth); but the bigger picture seems like something stuck iin 2009. Or what am I missing? -- Hoary ( talk) 10:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Last Thursday (August 11), User:Iamiyouareyou changed the pron file to have a non-English pronunciation for some reason (the edit summary was something to do with "not using English accent on a non-English name" or some borderline-racist nonsense like that). Now if I could figure out how to undo that and change it back to the American version that was there before I would, but I'm not well up with how the Commons works. Could somebody friendly fix this for me please? — 80.1.161.16 ( talk) 19:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
In the Family and personal life section, the article stated that Obama has seven half-siblings from his Kenyan father's family – six of them living – and a half-sister with whom he was raised, Maya Soetoro-Ng, the daughter of his mother and her Indonesian second husband.
Barack Obama actually has ten half-siblings, as itemized below.
(i) From Barack Obama Sr and Kezia Obama: Abon’go (Roy) Malik Obama (1958), Dr. Auma Obama (1960), Abo Obama (1968), Bernard Obama (1970)
(ii)From Barack Obama Sr and Ruth Baker: Mark Okoth Ndesandjo (1965), David Opiya Ndesandjo (1967)
(iii) From Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham: President Barack Obama II (1961)
(iv) From Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro: Maya Kassandra Soetoro (1970)
(v) From Barack Obama Sr. and Jael: George Hussein Onyango Obama (1982)
(vi) From Lolo Soetoro and Erna Kustina: Yusuf Aji Soetoro (1981), Rahayu Nurmaida Soetoro (1987)
Source: Presidential Candidates. Org
First ever post, so please excuse any procedural mistakes in making this request. Cheers
MishaKeats (
talk) 21:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
This is simply not notable, and we have also one much more important first in the article: "He is the first African American to hold the office."
Just checked, that for example in other US president's artilce's you don't list this minor fact: Bill Clinton the first who born in Arkansas, Richard Nixon in California, Jimmy Carter in Georgia, Ronald Reagan in Illinois etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.186.10 ( talk) 10:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Is there any way to reduce the amount of "blue" in the lead? Currently, approximately 50% (1065/2119) of characters (excluding spaces and the pronunciation of Obama's name, as well as hidden text and formatting such as [[
, ]]
and '''
) in the lead are part of a wikilink. The breakdown, by paragraph, is as follows:
This makes the lead more difficult to read and essentially buries useful links to relevant articles in a sea of blue.
-- Black Falcon ( talk) 19:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
There are a number of unintuitive piped links in the lead. I understand that their purpose is to minimize the amount of text, but "easter egg"-type links are not reader-friendly and are almost entirely meaningless in print versions of the article. The links which caught my attention are:
Link (as it appears) | Wikicode | Notes |
---|---|---|
first | [[List of African-American firsts|first]]
|
the text that follows is a link to African American |
Democratic primary | [[United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004#Democratic primary|Democratic primary]]
|
the preceeding text is "March 2004" |
keynote address at the Democratic National Convention | [[2004 Democratic National Convention keynote address|keynote address]] at the [[2004 Democratic National Convention|Democratic National Convention]]
|
the link to the 2004 DNC could be removed: e.g., " keynote address at the Democratic National Convention" |
gradually withdrew combat troops from Iraq | [[Withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq|gradually withdrew combat troops]] from [[Iraq War|Iraq]]
|
it seems unnecessary to link to Iraq War: e.g., "gradually withdrew combat troops from Iraq" |
Afghanistan | [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghanistan]]
|
Afghanistan is a separate article about the country |
kill | [[Death of Osama bin Laden|kill]]
|
-- Black Falcon ( talk) 19:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2011/08/almost-all-american-presidents-play_19.html
Probably add: "Barack Obama plays chess.". My wild guess that this can be more important/interesting than the fact his dog's name is Bo.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.46.127 ( talk) 14:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, everyone knows how historic it was that he was the first President of African American decent. But I think it's also just as interesting and noteworthy (though it doesn't get as much attention) that he was the first born outside the lower 48 United States (as would have McCain if he had won) and the first President born in the second half of the 20th century (they made a VERY big deal about Kennedy being the first born in the 20th century). I keep trying to add these in the intro but a few others are making excuses for deleting them. It's just so annoying trying to make contributions only for them to get zapped on some technicality. I can understand insisting on "reliable sources" if the entry is of a questionable or controversial nature or if it's something we're otherwise not sure about. But in my case, there is no real dispute that the above is true (Wikipedia is quite clear that common sense/common knowledge statements don't need sources). And if we can include in Jimmy Carter's article that he was the first born in a hospital, I don't see why we can't include the above. Estil ( talk) 20:02, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
I believe there are two separate issues here. Being born in the second half of the 20th century is not notable. Being the first to be born outside the continental United States is notable, as is Jimmy Carter being first to be born in a hospital and Bill Clinton being the first to be born after World War 2.
This article on U.S. President Barack Obama seems to be all in all quite good to me. However, the section "Foreign policy" does not contain anything on Obama´s political standings and actions toward general world politics, even towards Europe and Russia. Maybe even China, I don´t know now. And what about the world monetary problems of today? Other economic problems? Nowadays topics like first actions for 2012 election campaign? Well, there is a large field for new serious contributions. -- Zbrnajsem ( talk) 09:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
The first days section is very light, and ought to include more substance. I propose the Gitmo EO be included. The Administration itself stressed the importance of the three EOs it signed on January 22, 2009 as representing a clean break from the previous Administration. Considering that the critique of certain foreign and national security policies of the Bush Administration remain the same in substance in this Administration, the Guantanamo Bay Executive Order is quite notable. Here are some articles from when it happen that explain the context in which he signed them:
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order_1_detention-guantanamo-bay-torture?_s=PM:POLITICS http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7845585.stm
And here are some establishing the importance of the fact Guantanamo Bay remained open one year later despite the Executive Order:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/politics/main6129494.shtml http://pubrecord.org/politics/8687/president-obama-loses-guantanamo/
Oneinatrillion ( talk) 21:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Proposed text: "Libyan war ended with an estimated total killed on both sides including civilians: 20,000." (source for the number: 2011 Libyan civil war). But two more wars to go, war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not so bad from a Nobel Peace Prize winner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.151.142 ( talk) 13:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Closing to avoid attracting trolling -- Scjessey ( talk) 12:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I imagine this has been discussed innumerable times before but isn't "African-American" a bit vague and misleading a term to describe BO's ethnic background? Considering he is half white and half Kenyan, shouldn't the proper term to use be " mulatto"? - Red marquis ( talk) 03:28, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
My cousin has an African-American Dad and an Caucasian Mom and he is classified as Bi-Racial so what makes the President so different? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CEfirestone ( talk • contribs) 08:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC) I read your FAQ and its wrong,you cant take everything the media tells you serious.He is Bi-racial PERIOD. Preceding unsigned comment added by CEfirestone ( talk • contribs)08:46, 17 July 2011
Is there any consensus that he's "African American?" Literally, he's clearly multi-racial, since is mother was white. He wasn't born or raised in africa, and wasn't raised in a household influenced significantly be african culture (i.e., his african father left the household when he was a small child). People I know from africa laugh at the American label "african-american" - since people on the african continent do not consider the african continent as defining a culture or people. I'm not taking a poll/vote, but curious if there's any reasoned consensus on this subject. John2510 ( talk) 04:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I find this entire argument completely superfluous. The thing is, he is fairly dark skinned, therefore people of African decent can and will relate to him. This is regardless of what he decent "technically is" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.219.17.221 ( talk) 03:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Randnotell ( talk) 02:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC) I think his Census form choice and the analysis of it settles it at "African-American" or "Black." http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/04/nation/la-na-obama-census4-2010apr04 Oneinatrillion ( talk) 18:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC) Wow, I have never seen wikipedia drop the ball so far as this. Some very questionable arguments above. Let me ask this - so if Vanilla Ice said he identified himself as an African American would that be enough to warrant it as 'fact' and be included on wikipedia? Of course not. There is obviously a serious and disturbing history of classifying anyone who is not 100% white as whatever ethnic minority they perhaps appear to be. However that's not factual, and wikipedia as I understand it is based on verifiable information - not how an individual 'feels' or 'identifies' as. The president is clearly as much white as he is black, and to say otherwise is clearly reenforcing a double standard. If he went around saying he checked 'caucasian' there would be no way that wouldn't be heralded as completely insane. So why is it okay for him to ignore the white half and say he's 'black'? User:jtw — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.25.218.0 ( talk) 06:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC) |
See: http://www.gallup.com/poll/148739/Obama-Approval-Drops-New-Low.aspx. This should be added to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.40.195 ( talk) 12:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
It is a new low, it's just a new low for Barakandroll.
Ought to be mentioned? Reading "First Days" it felt absent. Thoughts? Oneinatrillion ( talk) 18:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
The last sentence under the heading "Economic policy" reads as: "The compromise overcome opposition from some in both parties, and...". The word 'overcome' should be 'overcame'. W1 m2 ( talk) 21:53, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
I've found: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_were_Barack_Obama's_grades_in_college Probably it is worthy to add it: "Barack Obama has not released transcripts for his grades from Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law. He has also not released his SAT and LSAT scores. No explanation has been offered for not releasing them." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.148.241 ( talk) 16:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Well said, Frank - exactly right. Tvoz/ talk 00:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
In which subarticle are places named after Obama mentioned? I found a school in Dallas, Texas named after him: http://www.dallasisd.org/obama WhisperToMe ( talk) 01:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Just wondering, Why is it that some famous biracil African Americans, like Tiger Woods and Barack Obama are only noted in for being African American and not biracial. That in my opinion is not reporting history correctly. I believe that is what the biracial term means. Mlt Mlt1963 ( talk) 03:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The speech on the American Jobs Act should be mentioned in the 2012 presidential campaign section as it is widely regarded as the kick off for his campaign. FranklinDObama ( talk) 09:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
rename this article Barack Obama remove the Hussein from his name in the article cannot bear to read that Muslim name being associated with him. Mranderson56 ( talk) 06:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Lots of articles of great leaders are there on Wikipedia where the middle name is not even mentioned.why cant the same thing be done here.i really dont want history to remember him as Barack Hussein Obama but as Barack Obama.please remove the Hussein it is my request to you.please beg of you to remove the middle name man its unbearable. Mranderson56 ( talk) 04:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
In foreign policy section there is a picture with the following text: "President Obama featured on a billboard with Ghana President John Atta Mills. In Ghana, like many African countries, Obama is very popular." This is clearly in wrong section, I don't see the connection between Obama's foreign policy and a billboard picture in Ghana. Moreover the text for me seems original resource, because it gives no reference for that Obama is very popular in Ghana. Furthermore for me it is not surprising how you manipulate the picture's text here. This picture can be found in two other wikipedia page, and let's see their text:
Do you see my problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.189.154 ( talk) 21:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Have a look at: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/01/politics/obama-lgbt/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
my suggestion for the article: "The president currently supports same-sex civil unions". I don't remember for such a strong support of gays from any US president. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.45.165 ( talk) 15:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Have a look at: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/09/21/barack-obama-troy-davis-martin-luther-king/
The latest case, Obama has not saved the innocent Troy Davis from the death penalty, and killed yesterday. Moreover from the article, which I think should be suitable for our article: "He has supported the rebels as they lynched black men in Libya. He has lent his full support to Mahmoud Jibril, the rebel leader, who has approved the commission of genocide against the black Tawergha of Libya. And he has pursued a war, based on propaganda, which is killing civilians daily in Liby." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.147.196 ( talk) 10:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I have an edit request to add the more prominent nicknames of Obama into the sidebar like his most common "No drama-bama" Kentpaulgta ( talk) 23:04, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Well considering there is a page that already displays this, You'd think you could add considering it is valid information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Drama_Obama#Barack_Obama — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentpaulgta ( talk • contribs) 01:30, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
If there's a page that has this info, why does it have to be doubled here, given the article is very long already? (magicmulder) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.82.64.222 ( talk) 11:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
From the 3rd paragraph: "Several events brought him to national attention during the campaign, including his victory in the March 2004 Illinois Democratic primary for the Senate election and his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in July 2004."
Without any source that it was a national attention. Furthermore note that he was an Illinois Senator for 8 years, so it is hard to say that he was unknown.
And this is also: "He was a community organizer in Chicago before earning his law degree. He worked as a civil rights attorney in Chicago and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004."
I believe it is true, but for lots of non-US residents this is not known fact. So for them it would be great to add a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.46.158 ( talk) 21:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Could someone looks at how the templates are set up at the bottom of this page please? The issue is that there are links instead of templates down there. I've not seen anything like it before, and I am not sure how to fix it. Thank you in advance. Backtable Speak to me concerning my deeds. 07:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I saw this at WP:VPT, and can offer a technical fix, but it is not without its own problems. Essentially, I have substituted a large number of templates, so that they are no longer transcluded. You can see the result at User:NSH001/sandbox 2.
The technique is to use Special:Expand templates to substitute some of the citation templates - in this case, those placed as list-defined references in the "Notes" section. This process is NOT straightforward - Special:Expand templates won't expand templates within <ref> ... </ref> tags, so the ref tags have to be edited first, then Special:Expand templates applied, then the tags edited back again, then the wikitext finally pasted back into the article (I used an external text editor to edit the ref tags).
The advantages are that fewer templates are now transcluded, so the limits are no longer breached, and the page will load a little faster.
The disadvantages are the difficulty of future maintenance: firstly any global changes made to the citation templates will no longer be reflected in the article; secondly it becomes much harder to edit these citations (it might even be necessary to maintain a separate subpage (probably of this talk page) to hold the un-substituted version of the templates).
Because of these disadvantages, I have not made any changes to the article. Instead, I think it should be discussed here first. If you decide to use it, all that's needed is to copy/paste the wikitext from the "Notes" section of my sandbox version over the corresponding wikitext in the mainspace article.
My own view is that this should be regarded as a temporary fix only. This is a Featured Article, so it can and should be trimmed, either deleting material altogether, or moving it to appropriate "Main" articles.
-- NSH001 ( talk) 15:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
This is inaccurate. He is the only one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.4.70 ( talk) 14:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Well first of all he is Biracial, even though I know he identifies as African American, the beginning of the article should at least state he is the first president of African American descent or first president of Irish/African descent. Educatedlady ( talk) 06:48, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Worth to include say: "Observers have said the U.S. President's hair has changed colour dramatically because of the pressures of the job since he assumed office two years ago." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.185.42 ( talk) 12:59, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Today I added the sentence, "On October 21, 2011 President Obama announced that all U.S. troops would leave Iraq in time to be, 'home for the holidays.' [200]" but I'm having trouble doing the footnote correctly as it's my first one, and I'm not very good at understanding the directions in the tutorial. Could someone please check the reference and tell me if I need to do anything differently. Carmaskid ( talk) 04:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
The following sentence does not make sense and is incorrect, as written: "Before Adm. Mike Mullen, now Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had visited Israel for over a decade, but in 2010 he made two trips, bringing his total to four.[207]"
The information in the original source that was cited, reads, "Meanwhile, visits by the Israeli and American military brass have jumped dramatically. Since becoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 2007, Adm. Michael Mullen has made four visits to Israel, two of them this year alone. Before Adm. Mullen, no chairman of the joint chiefs had visited Israel for over a decade."
I suggest the text would better read, "Adm. Mike Mullen, current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has made four trips to Israel since 2007, two of them in 2010. Prior to that time no Chairman of the Joint Chiefs had done so for over ten years." Since I cannot make the edit, I would appreciate it if an administrator did so. ( talk) 07:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
This is the Obama article, not the Mullen article. Likewise, mention of the death of some old governor (forgot his name) wouldn't be included because that old governor has nothing to do with Obama. BAMP ( talk) 14:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Just thought I'd bring this to your attention, Obama is in fact, not the 44th, but the 43rd President of the United States, as Grover Cleveland held the position twice non-consecutively. 124.184.247.174 ( talk) 11:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Best solution is to have a footnote. BAMP ( talk) 14:18, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
I have been told that this article is on article probation.
That means you need to discuss changes. If you do not, that may be vandalism. Anyone can revert vandalism. To do so is helping Wikipedia. Please don't vandalize!
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hi Balloon Boy ( talk • contribs) 03:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
This article seems like it is just a bunch of pieces mixed together. It is very disjointed and the selection of what appears is not comprehensive. It could be a result of political supporters or opponents crafting together an article. The percentage of online people supporting him is slightly greater so that affects the article.
There should be entirely new people reviewing this article because the people who wrote it probably put a lot of time into it but the product is not good. I am not going to be a reviewer except to choose one paragraph.
The paragraph
As president, Obama signed economic stimulus legislation in the form of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February 2009 and the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act in December 2010. Other domestic policy initiatives include the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act and the Budget Control Act of 2011. In foreign policy, he gradually withdrew combat troops from Iraq, increased troop levels in Afghanistan, signed the New START arms control treaty with Russia, ordered enforcement of the UN-sanctioned no-fly zone over Libya, and ordered the military operation that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. In April 2011, Obama declared his intention to seek re-election in the 2012 presidential election.[4]
The critique
This is in the introduction. It is just a selection of laws that people have selected. Some of them are not really Obama related, only happened to be President. This is because some of them were not his campaigning. If we use that measure, then the Lady Gaga article could have mention of some of these bills (just kidding).
My advice is to work on one paragraph every two weeks and really see if you need it. Start with the first paragraph.
With this sample paragraph, listing these bills looks like an ad. One way to fix it would be to see what are Obama's major accomplishments. They are the stimulus bill (don't need to have those fancy bill names as they are now chosen because of politics), Obama's health care.
Another way to fix it Another way to fix it would be to have a new committee of people who have never written about Obama and have them craft an article. Then compare and contrast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hood River ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Yet another way, probably better is to step back and pick 4 paragraphs to do an introduction.
paragraph 1: general introduction as the 44th President, African American, Democrat, etc.
paragraph 2: Previous background as Hawaii, Indonesia, etc. College where. After college and law school. Illinois Senate, US Senate.
paragraph 3: Very broad Presidential summary. Term marred by recession, had stimulus, Obama health care, possible loss of House due to Obama health care. Not a lot of law mentioned here.
paragraph 4: Other things, like author, Nobel Prize, but certainly not the 2010 Siena College poll (which shouldn't even be in the main article...why is it even there!) Hood River ( talk) 05:32, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Wikidemon's assessment that the article is a scatterbrained list of presidentials events. Voting is silly because then it will reflect his popularity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demonwiki2 ( talk • contribs) 01:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC) Some ideas mentionedd are good in theory. There should not be a laundry list of bills that President Obama signed. I removed a few trivial ones, trivial in the sense that President Obama did not campaign hard for these bills, did not make it an issue. If we let a lot of less relevant stuff be in the article, soon it will be an article about "The World during Barack Obama's Presidency", not "Barack Obama".
Here is what I removed:
The first bill signed into law by Obama was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, relaxing the statute of limitations for equal-pay lawsuits. [1] Five days later, he signed the reauthorization of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover an additional 4 million children currently uninsured. [2]
On October 8, 2009, Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, a measure that expands the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. [3] [4]
On March 30, 2010, Obama signed the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, a reconciliation bill which ends the process of the federal government giving subsidies to private banks to give out federally insured loans, increases the Pell Grant scholarship award, and makes changes to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. [5] [6]
If you don't agree, cite where Obama was a key driving factor in these laws or cite articles where he made it a big deal. Issues that Obama made a big deal include closing Gitmo and the stimulus packages. Hi Balloon Boy ( talk) 02:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
The removal of the hate crime paragraph makes sense because Obama did not make it a big issue about hate crimes. The Ledbetter part some people may want since it was the first, but not really a notable first. So hate crimes, no, Ledbetter, maybe if enough people really want it. Sorry, HBB you win some, lose some. Same to Scjessey...please both of you get along. BAMP ( talk) 14:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Balloon Boy, I'd be careful acting like you have a moral high ground when it comes to disruptive behavior in the form of accusatory language. Remember that you have thrown many accusations against other editors in this conversation yourself, including a false claim of criminal behavior. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 14:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Note: This issue is being discussed at WP:ANI at the moment. -- Scjessey ( talk) 14:36, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree with II and Scjessey. The act may be something that women like but it is not a major part of Obama's history. Therefore, it doesn't belong in the article. BAMP ( talk) 16:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
This article is poorly written. The trouble is that a few people defend the status quo.
Let's take one section, Israel.
That section poorly defines Obama's biography in relationship to Israel. It mentions strong support and the missile system.
Off the top of my head, if there is an Israel section (does it need to be there?) then the spat with Netanyahu is relevant as well as settlements. Obama's trying to stop Gaza from being a member might be another issue.
Basically, the selection of issues is lop sided. It seems that one Wall Street Journal source is used to justify the content.
There should be consensus to include Israel. After there is consensus, there should be consensus to what to include. Baring any consensus, nothing on Israel should be included, not the status quo. My vote is that some things be included, not a total removal of the section. BAMP ( talk) 18:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
On January 25, 2011, in his 2011 State of the Union Address, President Obama focused strongly on the themes of education and innovation, stressing the importance of innovation economics in working to make the United States more competitive globally. Among other plans and goals, Obama spoke of a enacting a five-year freeze in domestic spending, eliminating tax breaks for oil companies and tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans, banning congressional earmarks, and reducing healthcare costs. Looking to the future, Obama promised that by 2015, the United States would have 1 million electric vehicles on the road and by 2035, clean-energy sources would be providing 80 percent of U.S. electricity.
There have been many, many State of the Union addresses. Most of forgettable.
Focus strongly? That is opinion.
Importance of innovation economics? That is rehashing the speech.
Weathiest Americans is just campaign speech.
On January 25, 2011, Obama delivered his yearly State of the Union Address. The speech included ideas on education and to make the United States more competitive globally. He proposed a five-year freeze in domestic spending, eliminating tax breaks for oil companies and increasing the top tax bracket (commonly called "Bush tax cuts" which were extended in a 2010 deal), banning congressional earmarks. Obama promised that by 2015, the United States would have 1 million electric vehicles on the road and by 2035, clean-energy sources would be providing 80 percent of U.S. electricity. Hi Balloon Boy ( talk) 14:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: "If Martin Luther King were alive today I believe that would remind us that unemployed people have a right to condemn the arrogance of Wall Street without demonizing all those who work there.", said U.S. President Barack Obama at the opening of the National Memorial Center dedicated to M. L. King in Washington, according The Guardian. The question for discussion is: Did Obama hit the King`s dream? Perhaps is to early to say so, but I think it`s the best way. For this thesis I have three strong argument: Obama is the first African American President of the United States, he was and still is fighting for peace in the world, and capitalism with a human face. 78.2.49.135 ( talk) 04:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
It seems the Israel section needs some revision to reflect Obama's policy positions. Right now it reads that he supports a "two state solution", and while I am sure he has said those words in his speeches, that is not his policy. He officially opposes recognizing Palestine as an independent state and officially opposes allowing them a vote at the United Nations, unless they agree to various hardline conditions such has agreeing never to have an army and not having a right of return. No such conditions are put on recognizing Israel an an independent state. 97.91.176.159 ( talk) 00:08, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Ok so we have a source. but your are still not changing the article. There is infact no mention of his opposition to a Palestinian state at all. And it actually tries to imply the opposite, saying that he is for a two stzte solution, which is clearly not the case, He only recognizies Israel, not Palestine as a state. 15:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.176.159 ( talk)
I was under the impression that the correct wording is "As [b]P[/b]resident, Obama administered over..." etc. This article uses "As [b]p[/b]resident, Obama administered over..." etc. Are we sure this is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.47.150.42 ( talk) 00:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Despite the FAQ Q4, the "II" is incorrect because
I understand that this is a featured article but there is always room to fine tune any written piece, and sometimes it is helpful to have new eyes look at it. The following is an outline of this article as it currently exists.
Barack Obama
I have read this article multiple times, recently. I think that it ends discordantly. All the personal information belongs together. I'm not quite sure about the appropriate placement for the section on cultural and political image, as I need to go back and read that section again. It might make a good transition between the sections on personal and professional life. I left it at the end of the list for the present. IMHO, the following reorginazation would increase the readability of the article. The new outline would be similar to the following:
Barack Obama
In the Domestic arena section we might consider adding information on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and something about Political opposition as, historically, that factor is germane to any president's legacy. If that were added, the 2010 midterm elections should be included there.
I have read the discussion on length and citations and if the article needs to be split, what would be included here under "Presidency?" I'm willing to do the reorganizing if doing so is agreed upon. I could work on it in my sandbox. Also, is there a standard guideline telling what basic sections to include in the biography of a living person? (Guess I'll go look for that after I post this.) Thoughts and comments? Carmaskid ( talk) 07:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of current and ongoing scandals involving the whitehouse, namely Solyndra and Fast and Furious? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.159.149 ( talk) 21:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I posted this on Dr.K.'s talk page, but he/she refused to just offer this there and insisted I bring here so the experts could weight in. Anyway, I'm just curious, I might have missed something but why did he/she remove that from this article, I personally didn't like the section title but the section itself seemed well sourced with reliable sources. Maybe you can offer up some clarification. Thanks. CRRays Head90 | We Believe! 03:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
[redacted]
Obama's Civil Rights Law practice is something he was particularly proud of, and historically will position him as a president, but it is a curious omission that absolutely no mention is made of it in this encyclopedia entry? (see video of excerpted interview below at 2:10 below)
"(I) started my Civil Rights Practice representing women and minorities- workers who had been discriminated against on the job" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b91nsPDQFUk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.236.186.178 ( talk) 16:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Seems clear to me that the infobox should not include his position as a Senate subcommittee chair - we use the infobox to highlight major positions held, and subcommittee chair does not rise to the level of notability of State Senator, US Senator, and President. It's appropriately in the text, but in order to keep the infobox useful, it's best to keep it streamlined and as uncluttered as possible. I removed it from the infobox - any disagreement? Tvoz/ talk 03:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
We've had this many times. see FAQ. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 00:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||||
Just wanted to point out that Obama isn't African-American. African-American refers to the people whose descendants were traded in the slave trade, mostly in West Africa. His mother is white and born in the states. His father is black and was born in Kenya. He was born in Hawaii. Obama has no claims to african-american heritage. Rather, he is Kenyan-American. He is black, but not african-american. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.17.184.254 ( talk) 03:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Its factually incorrect. His racial makeup is clear. Outer skin color does not define race. He is Bi-Racial or if you prefer mixed race. He is not black nor is he white. Saying he is african-american any usage of the term. Yes it is important to correct such fallacies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.68.88 ( talk) 06:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC) Apparently feel good slogans and not fact. The article perpetuates a lie and does a disservice to reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.68.88 ( talk) 23:51, 29 November 2011 (UTC) What is listed as his race is misleading.
Prose qualityThere are a lot of paragraphs that begin with the phrase "On [date], [year], ...". There are also a lot of paragraphs that are only one or two sentences long. Could we not change this to make the prose more professional and engaging to read? 138.38.59.78 ( talk) 16:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Stable version
Obama isn't "african-american"I invite everyone to go to the Wikipedia page African-American. The definition, with sources and all, clearly states that African-Americans "are citizens or residents of the United States who have at least partial ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa and are the direct descendants of enslaved Africans within the boundaries of the present United States.". It is a widely published fact that his father migrated to Hawaii from Kenya. Obama is not a "direct descendant of enslaved Africans" and therefore cannot be considered and African-American.-- Jacksoncw ( talk) 19:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
First African American PresidentNo he is not. He was not born in Africa. He was born in Hawaii, so at least he should be called the first Hawaiian President. That is well documented, but yet you still continue to call him 'African'. He is not. He is of mixed race-mulatto, is the term. His father was from Africa-not this man. His white mother-from Kansas. It seems that this is ignored. If your going to have facts-state them correctly. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aircarrier ( talk • contribs) 13:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
|
I know this may sound a bit mad, but stick with me.....
As the top of the talk page points out, this article has been cited by no fewer than fourteen different media organisations. Big ones, too: CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Daily Telegraph, etc. etc. Doesn't that then mean that there are sufficiently enough non-trival mentions from reliable sources that we could theoretically write a Wikipedia article about this Wikipedia article? I'm sure that I've seen articles get passed through WP:N with considerably fewer sources on their subjects... I know it might seem like quite an odd thing for an encyclopedia for write an article about, but let's not forget that we also have an article about buttered cats. 86.168.92.16 ( talk) 03:27, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
From the most recent Obama video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyjkVAgRFRk you can see that the president has got too bright white color teeth, see also the shape and the structure of the teeth. For me it suggests that he has got only denture. It should be good for the article if somebody could obtain an official medical report of the president's teeth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.83.188.14 ( talk) 12:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
no idea where the "bias" is. For everything else, see FAQ Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Shouldn't he just be "American" What is African about President Obama? He was born in Hawaii right? So he's American. I understand it is socially wrong to be racist against any race except whites, and it is always okay to be bias and for any other race especially that of African descent, but really, this is Wikipedia. Isn't Wikipedia supposed to be unbias and fair? If I am a black man and I am married to a white woman, and I have a child, that child is not "black" or African American, that child is mixed race, and if that child is born in America, he or she is "American" One is African American if he or she was born in and came from Africa to become American. Please, put aside your anti-white racist bias ways, stop preaching for unbias ideas while doing bias things, walk the walk if you are going to talk the talk, and be fair. If you don't, I hope someone with the money to sues Wikipedia for allowing this bias trash to continue. President Obama is not black, he is not African American, he is mixed race and he is American. use logic instead of social brainwashing to write your articles. 50.47.145.163 ( talk) 08:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC) |
The following discussion 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.
I think we need to be careful. Some of the attempts to argue this are a bit silly, but the hidden discussion above is a telling one. The USA is far more concerned with racial issues than many countries, certainly more than mine, so it demands racial descriptors, where other countries may not even bother with them. African American is the current politically correct alternative to the now totally unacceptable Negro or nigger. In its own way, it's no less racist. It's just the current nice way of describing the same people. While not being as diplomatic as he may have been, the poster in that now hidden discussion was saying that he would prefer everyone to be just called American, rather than having racial labels. I tend to agree with him.
His post may have looked like one of not understanding. I think he understood very well.
Rather than simply jumping on these posters and hiding or deleting their comments, a little engagement may go a long way. HiLo48 ( talk) 21:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Obama Signed NDAA. Should be mentioned in the article.-- 76.31.238.174 ( talk) 05:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I noticed that a hidden category was added to this article placing it to the Article Feedback 5 Additional Articles. While on the face of it, it seems innocent and also worth while. However, this article sees a lot of people looking to push their POV into it. This is one of the main reasons why it is semi-protected and also is on article probation. This sort of feedback mechanism on this specific page will most assuredly be gamed by those very same people wanting to push their POV. Consequently, feedback from that survey would be tainted by responders bias and would be considered unreliable or not truly representative of the entire Wikipedia reader community. 74.79.34.29 ( talk) 11:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
How is it that controversy and criticism hardly appear in this article. This president has one of the most extreme policy agendas and is largely devoid of any substance. If the purpose of Wikipedia articles is for a fair and balanced picture (NPOV) I think a bit more attention to the alternate points of view on this president should be included. See George W. Bush's article and search for "criti" or "controv" and you'll find a much more complete record. 70.26.39.203 ( talk) 04:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, let's start with criticisms of his health care plan, the handling of the assassination of Bin Laden, and military strikes in 3 countries without congressional approval.
174.52.9.91 (
talk) 04:39, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Unless I am missing something in the article, it's not as though there are praises of the man put in there either. By which I mean I don't see anything like "many claimed x policy to be the greatest thing ever." I definitely could see notable reactions, positive or negative, to specific policy initiatives in the sub article about his presidency. I could even see strictly factual information such as popular opinion polls about a particular issue, but even then I would tend to think that should be on the article about his presidency not his biography. Bottom line, whatever is added should be verifiable facts and not opinions (whether they be the editors' opinions or quoting another person's opinion). For instance, verifiable information that a particular policy had a particular result (be it negative or positive) would be acceptable, but a pundit or blog simply saying "this policy sucks" would not be acceptable. Jdlund ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC).
Several other recent Presidents have a separate heading in their article for judicial appointments. I would suggest pulling out the Sotomayor and Kagan appointments from the "Domestic policy" section and putting them in their own section (perhaps with additional information on appointments to lower courts). — DavidConrad ( talk) 14:06, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion 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.
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request this line be edited: "Barack Hussein Obama II (Listeni/bəˈrɑːk huːˈseɪn oʊˈbɑːmə/; born August 4, 1961) is the 44th and current President of the United States. He is the first African American to hold the office.
Barack Hussein Obama's mother was white, and his father was African American (black)
The correct terminology is "Mulatto" So, it should read that he is the first Mulatto to hold the office. Mixed or Bi-Racial is also acceptable, Bi-Racial preferred.
His mother was white, why is obama's white heritage not reported?? According to your own Wiki, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulatto This is the definition of obama's racial background. So to be correct and accurate, obama's true race should be input into the wiki, not denying one race or the other.
Ghostsouls ( talk) 05:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
WP:FORUM; bring sources, then come back Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
As far as his personal image, there are some terms that he brought into widespread use. This is a good addition. Think hard. I can think of some of them. They include shellacking and teachable moment. Neither term was used until Obama used them. There are a few more. There are also some events during his Presidency that are really not part of his biography. These should be trimmed. Anything that he was not a major proponent and waged a major public campaign for is potentially good material. The other stuff is not and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midemer ( talk • contribs) 06:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC) The Section mentioning the Death of Osama Bin Laden should be edited to just say that he announced the death and not orchestrated or anything to that effect. Our Fine Military killed Osama and not by the order of barrak. If any president deserves this in their Bio its George W. Bush. Since he originally ordered his acquisition. ( Sirbiff10 ( talk) 03:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)) |
WP:FORUM. We go by published sources. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Romney was criticized for using the term severely conservative. Nobody uses that term. Some suggest he is a fake conservative and was trying to overcompensate. Likewise, some Obama supporters (but not me) try to go overboard and insist he is Christian because of the previous controversy. However, Christians do not call themselves that except to foreigners who can't speak English. Christians call themselves Catholic or Methodist, etc. Other politician's articles use United Church of Christ in the box. It is also possible that opponents of Obama want Christianity in the box to highlight the un-natural use of the word. Again, why not UCC? Also Obama did not denounce the UCC. He only resigned from being a deacon or a member of the particular congregation. As such, I am fixing the infobox. Midemer ( talk) 06:36, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Ask someone what their religion is? They say "Baptist" or "Catholic". Ask them in a foreign country and they might say "Christian". But I realize there are many anti-Obama people who want to cast doubt on Obama so they use "christian" as his religion, not United Church of Christ. Since there are 120 million people against Obama in the U.S. out of 300 million, you're never going to win that argument even if you are right. Midemer ( talk) 01:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
|
WP:FORUM; bring those sources you think exist, then come back Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Inbreeding is when a college department faculty got their degrees from there. After a while, there is no new ideas, just preaching to the choir. I fear this has happened to the Obama article. The same old people say no, no, no, and chase people away. I have read the summary of the article. Some of it is ok but some of it suffers from inbreeding. There are some points which shouldn't be there. For example, McCain is just an old man and an obscure person. Look at President James Madison. He ran against DeWitt Clinton. The President is not defined by the man he ran against. Instead, look at the most important things of Obama. Draw up a list of the 10 most important things and all of those must be included. One of the 10 things is that he is President, is American, and was Senator. I will fix things. Midemer ( talk) 02:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Tromping over to the talk page to claim "inbreeding" is exactly the opposite of the WP:FIVE pillars that are the foundation of Wikipedia. If you have suggestions to improve the article; please feel free to make them. That is much more constructive - and much more likely to result in improvements to the article - than your recent attempts to make changes without WP:CONSENSUS. (Posting on the talk page and then making a fairly large change shortly thereafter does not constitute consensus.) Frank | talk 03:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC) In addition, the gratuitous assertion of inbreeding is highly unlikely to be viewed as representing collegial editing tendencies. Frank | talk 03:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
According to Politico, Barack Obama cited that his favorite animal was the egret, a type of white heron. I think that this is an important addition as it may give school children a research topic.
Sources: - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72167.html - In dreams of my father, Obama describes seeing an egret for the first time with his father and he states "[egrets] embody [the] spiritual freedom ... of the formerly subdued" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.28.186.30 ( talk) 02:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
The title Gaddafi is better because intervention ended with Gaddafi's death, and most intervention consisted of targeting Gaddafi. Its also been discussed here. Pass a Method talk 08:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is an excellent review of events in the President's life. But I wonder; what is the man like? Some may say this is not encyclopedic content, but peeking at the page of the famously moral Cato the Younger reveals this opening paragraph:
Marcus Porcius Cato Uticensis (95 BC, Rome – April 46 BC, Utica), commonly known as Cato the Younger (Cato Minor) to distinguish him from his great-grandfather (Cato the Elder), was a politician and statesman in the late Roman Republic, and a follower of the Stoic philosophy. A noted orator, he is remembered for his stubbornness and tenacity (especially in his lengthy conflict with Julius Caesar), as well as his immunity to bribes, his moral integrity, and his famous distaste for the ubiquitous corruption of the period.
Since we can include personality and character traits of long-passed historical figures, I vote that we do the same for modern historical figures. TheThomas ( talk) 16:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Is part of his family from Brazil ? Please dame la pija ( talk) 21:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Please dame la pija ( talk) 21:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
This image comes from his campaign website and is a selective snapshot of favourable data which does not represent the expert consensus of the broader community. It should be removed 207.216.253.134 ( talk) 22:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Someone added this graph to the article – is this appropriate? It seems like a fairly selective bit of data, given the obvious shortcomings of the unemployment figure itself (which only charts benefit recipients, not long-term unemployed), and it goes against WP:SYNTH to imply that Obama is responsible for the unemployment figure. We could just as easily do the DJIA or GDP or number of private- vs. public-sector jobs created, but none of these really tell the whole story. — Designate ( talk) 19:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
This article has been removed from the category "American Christians" and been placed in the "African-American Christians" category. I understand that the former category is the parent of the latter, but the appearance is that Wikipedia believes that Blacks need to be segregated from the other American Christians. I suggest leaving Black Americans, including President Obama, in the American Christians category even though they are also in their own Christian category. Alternatively, merge the African-American Christians category into the American Christians category. SMP0328. ( talk) 03:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Arpaio on Thursday unveiled preliminary results of an investigation, conducted by members of his volunteer cold-case posse, into the authenticity of President Barack Obama’s birth certificate, a controversy that has been widely debunked but which remains alive in the eyes of some conservatives.
At a news conference, Arpaio said the probe revealed that there was probable cause to believe Obama’s long-form birth certificate released by the White House in April is a computer-generated forgery. He also said the selective service card completed by Obama in 1980 in Hawaii also was most likely a forgery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.135.204 ( talk) 18:55, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
If there is ever proof or widespread coverage, then it should be in the article. Until then, it is a joke. Everyone can see the computer generated form is recent. Nobody says it is 50 years old. But in the 1960's, air travel was rare so Obama couldn't have jetted to Kenya and back. It's just silly. He was born in Hawaii. McCain was born in Panama. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
The link to President Obama's speech announcing Osama Bin Laden's death seems a bit large. Someone should decrease its size. It's located in the Foreign policy section I would do it, but I don't know how. SMP0328. ( talk) 17:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I came across this article The Road We've Traveled and found blantant vandalism that needed to be reverted. Regardless of how you feel about the film, the article could use some improvement and some monitoring from experienced editors. Remember ( talk) 18:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
I found this buried in the archives. It is recent so it is really bad that someone is hiding it there. I accuse nobody though, just fixing it, copying it here for discussion and change. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the ideas of 1. close Gitmo 2. limiting salary to $500k to bailout banks 3. stimulus package 4. Obama health care 5. Speech to Egyptians 6. Afghanistan troop surge followed by a pull out starting 2 years later.
I also add that Obama is against making a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline because it pits his union supporters (for) against his Greenpeace supporters (against). Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I've added a few details and removed a few unnecessary details from the intro. If you disagree, please discuss it. Don't just remove it. Thank you. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Osama Bin Laden was attacked and killed in May, however the attack was planned in April. The section of the intro should be clarified, because it gives an incorrect statement on his actual death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick.metcalfe ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Obama is currently categorized as being Irish, Kenyan, Scottish, Swiss, and Welsh. How many of those are correct? SMP0328. ( talk) 16:00, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Alright, was the honorary degree given or taken back? http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/16/us-usa-catholics-contraception-idUSTRE81F12620120216
Twillisjr ( talk) 21:17, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
As far as his personal image, there are some terms that he brought into widespread use.
This is a good addition. Think hard. I can think of some of them. They include shellacking and teachable moment. Neither term was used until Obama used them. There are a few more.
There are also some events during his Presidency that are really not part of his biography. These should be trimmed. Anything that he was not a major proponent and waged a major public campaign for is potentially good material. The other stuff is not and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midemer (talk • contribs) 06:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
The Section mentioning the Death of Osama Bin Laden should be edited to just say that he announced the death and not orchestrated or anything to that effect. Our Fine Military killed Osama and not by the order of barrak. If any president deserves this in their Bio its George W. Bush. Since he originally ordered his acquisition. (Sirbiff10 (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC))
This is a good comment. Yet someone censored this and shoved it to the archives. If I was not curious, it would remain there. I am copying it here.
I fully agree that this article has a lot about his presidency unrelated to his biography. Part of it may be political opinion pushers trying to manipulate Wikipedia.
The terms shellacking and teachable moment should be included. Let's think of some other Obama-ism. These are important details of the biography of Obama. Afghandeaths ( talk) 23:06, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
Barack Obama is our first Mulatto president. 69.124.93.51 ( talk) 00:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
|
discussed many times -see archives and article text and notes
|
---|
The source says his title was "Senior Lecturer." Why aren't we using his actual job title instead of some fluffed up title he gave himself? Is it wikipedia policy to simply give people achievements when they declare they have them rather than going by the evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.64 ( talk) 23:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
They could call him "Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer," but the actual job title they gave him was "Senior Lecturer." Any particular reason why his actual job title isn't being used? Leading people on to believe he has an advanced degree in law is blatantly dishonest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.64 ( talk) 06:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
No I do not "own" the article, but if I could look at the histories of some people then I bet I'd see strong evidence that you think you do. I just read the "professor" article on the US, and they show lecturers as being distinct from professors. They also make clear the distinction between capital letter "Professor" and the lower-case informal "professor" and in this case the latter applies to Obama, but the former is the one actually used in the article, which is more evidence of intentional lying to promote Obama. I assume this is because the professor article states that a real professor has more prestige than a mere lecturer. It seems like you aren't actually reading my arguments and your mind was made up before I even posted so I'm not sure why I'm bothering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.64 ( talk) 16:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
This conversation is an absurd re-tread which has been had several dozen times before - see the archives. What article are you reading? Where do you see "Professor" in upper case as his job title? For quite a long time we have had "professor" in lower case in the infobox as a descriptive term, we say he "taught Constitutional Law" (which I know because I came up with the wording almost four years ago) and we give his title as Senior Lecturer in the text. This non-existent, and still pathetic, controversy is incredibly well-sourced as a sop to the idiotic complaints of anti-Obama trolls, which this is once again. Please, let's move on to the next idiocy. Tvoz/ talk 05:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
|
This article is massive, with the current version running to over 193 kilobytes. WP:SIZERULE says that a page of 100+ kilobytes "Almost certainly should be divided". Why isn't more material being split out to subarticles? Nyttend backup ( talk) 07:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
There should be a section that describes the presidents drug abuse including cocaine marajuana and addiction to nicotine inthe form of cigarretes and drug chewing gum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.129.218 ( talk) 02:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Read the twenty ird source. Also read this http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-struggles-smoking-addiction-praises-congress-new-tobacco-regulations/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.129.218 ( talk) 02:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
"Asked if the president still smoked, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama has "a struggle with nicotine addiction" every day.
Obama has a long history of smoking and a photo emerged of him during the campaign trail smoking as far back as college. During the presidential campaign, he chewed nicorette chewing gum in an effort to kick the habit. Gibbs said he "assumed" the president still chewed the nicorette. The president dodged questions at the start of his administration about whether he was still lighting up.
Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-struggles-smoking-addiction-praises-congress-new-tobacco-regulations/#ixzz1qHYJuott" — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
129.2.129.218 (
talk) 02:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)