![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
I've set the Political positions of Bernie Sanders article to redirect to the political positions section of this article. I did this because there was never consensus to migrate Bernie's political positions to a separate article, and the political positions article was essentially a carbon copy of what is included here on the main article. Of course, inconsistency between the two was starting to arise because people would edit here and not there or vice-versa. HappyWanderer15 ( talk) 11:51, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
A fuller treatment of any major subtopic should go in a separate article of its own. The original article should contain a section with a summary of the subtopic's article as well as a link to it. For copyright purposes the first edit summary of a subtopic article formed by cutting text out of a main article should link back to the original. It is advisable to develop new material in a subtopic before summarizing it in the main article. Templates are available to link to subtopics and to tag synchronization problems between a summary and an article it summarizes.
Also, WP:SPLIT is more appropriate for this article:
If an article becomes too large, or a section of an article has a length that is out of proportion to the rest of the article, it is often appropriate for some or all of the article to be split into new articles. In some cases, refactoring an article into child or sister articles can allow subtopics to be discussed more fully elsewhere without dominating a general overview article to which they are non-central (but only if the new articles are themselves sufficiently notable to be included in the encyclopedia).
The reason it makes sense to remove the redirect is to slim down what is already a huge section in the main Bernie Sanders article. One thing that can be done is just summarizing what Political positions of Bernie Sanders says in the main article. Buffaboy talk 20:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I've summarized Sanders' main positions and combined the information from this article with the information on the political positions article. This is something that was going to have to happen at some stage, so we might as well insure consistency now. Please feel free to improve and expand (but not too much!) HappyWanderer15 ( talk) 09:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I think its getting to the point where we should split off the political positions section into its own article titled Political positions of Bernie Sanders (currently a redirect) and rewrite the section in summery style. The reason for this is that Sanders political positions are getting significant media attention because of his presidential bid. The coverage of his political positions will only grow as time goes on and will require more detail for completeness that can be covered in its own article. What are peoples thoughts on the subject? Winner 42 Talk to me! 04:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I think that we need to commit to one approach or the other at this stage. There has been a separate political positions article created that has almost identical content to the main article. From this point on the potential exists for inconsistency between the two pages. I propose including a paragraph-form summary, which I would be happy to write, in the main article with a link to the political positions page for more detail. HappyWanderer15 ( talk) 11:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I litterally see no reason to split bernie's wikipedia page up except to make it more difficult to find his positions. Are people really complaining the scroll bar is too long on his page? If anything, it's too short. Other candidates have much bigger pages so logically, it does not seem consistent to do some sort of preemptive strike against his policy positions. I mean, is the reason this http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Constitutional%20Amendment%20FAQs.pdf isn't mentioned in the wikipedia page because of lack of space? no? If we really want to make a 2nd page (no reason to, but if we did want to) full of policy positions, we should fill THIS page the people expect to see policy positions on AND THEN if people complain, and only then, that it's too much to read, seperate it after discussing it with everyone in a deliberate manner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandirs ( talk • contribs) 05:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Allow me to quote: (copy-pasted textwall removed (I think its getting to the point where [...] seperate it after discussing it with everyone in a deliberate manner.) 184.101.251.129 ( talk) 19:37, 15 August 2015 (UTC))
We had a discussion about splitting off policy positions, nobody supported it because that isn't how wikipedia works. Someone removed policy positions anyway. You realize when you try and HIDE the truth from people obviously it makes them really really cool when they tell their friends in small groups? There isn't even a link to his policy positions on this page. The bias is emberrassingly obvious. Sorry billionaires, but if you had contributed to wikipedia more in the past at some point you would have known what a wiki-entry really looks like. It isn't just people agreeing with each other, they use logic and past precedent to decide if something is actually worthy of it's own article split off or if that is more of a 'silence' tactic by someone who is trying to make him less popular to the people? have you even met someone who hasn't been to one of his rallies yet? like seriously. #feelthebern — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandirs ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The fact that he's running for the highest political office in the United States should be noted in the opening paragraph. OrganicEarth ( talk) 04:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Seriously, you don't think Bernie Sanders is notable as a presidential candidate? Are you living on another planet? He's cleaning Hillary Clinton's clock int he polls. She draws hundreds at speeches, he draws thousands. Nobody except the people in New England had ever heard of Bernie before he announced his run for the presidency. He's not notable as the junior senator he's notable as a presidential candidate beating Hillary in the polls. SW3 5DL ( talk) 22:51, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
See WP:CANVASS. Don't use your buddies to edit war for you. SW3 5DL ( talk) 03:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
could we at least get the TERMS right here? lead sentence is lead sentence, not "lede...". "THE lede", otoh, is a special (historic) spelling, used mainly with "bury...".
it is a common mistake to use "lead" in that expression, but the converse -- "lede sentence" -- is a new one on me!
if u mean sentence CONTAINING "the lede", ok, then, it's actually not wrong. if, otoh, u mean FIRST SENTENCE -- as i suspect u do -- it's most definitely "lead". 209.172.23.221 ( talk) 02:02, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Rick_Perry#RFC_about_whether_his_presidential_candidacy_should_be_mentioned_in_the_lead_paragraph Anythingyouwant ( talk) 15:38, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
any particular reason my question here about his FAMILY was removed? just how is it that bernie is a yank while his brother a brit?
i am insinuating nothing with my question -- i am flat-out CURIOUS. did his parents live in the UK before bernie was born, or did his brother emigrate as an adult? 209.172.23.221 ( talk) 02:10, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
References
Does anyone have the time to find a few copy right free images, especially any of Bernie and the crowd at his talk in Maine? I did a quick search early this morning but didn't find anything. Maybe someone else will have better luck. Thanks. SW3 5DL ( talk) 18:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Why dont we just take some images of him from his campaign website? I am sure his team won't mind. Darkninja505 ( talk) 17:19, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
I believe that we have too many head shot photos of Sanders in the article. I'd like to remove two of them: 1) the photo added most recently is about the same vintage as his official photo and is a tad odd in that his hands are out of focus and 2) the extreme closeup taken in 2015 does nothing more than show the reader what he looks like - something not needed since we have plenty of photos already that have been taken over the years. (Unless, of course, someone could find a really old one from when he still had that head of curly hair. :)) Any disagreements to removing those two photos? Gandydancer ( talk) 12:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Recently an editor added:
"A guy named Adolf Hitler won an election in 1932. He won an election, and 50 million people died as a result of that election in World War II, including 6 million Jews. So what I learned as a little kid is that politics is, in fact, very important.”
Another editor made it into a block quote.
IMO this is just too much. Block quotes have the power to make a statement seem to be something that is of very high importance in the article, especially when it's the only one in a section, and this is not a highlight of his early life and education. Even though this information is already included in one of the splits, I can go along with including it, but to use a block quote gives it more importance than it warrants. Thoughts? Gandydancer ( talk) 14:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Jewish:
Judaism
Now please disregard what format news sources use and tell me whether the name of the religion we are discussing is "Jewish" or "Judaism". Do followers of said religion practice Jewish, or do they practice Judaism? Dustin (talk) 02:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh, and with regard to the earlier discussion, if we are not using the parameter to denote the religion, then it should not be in the infobox. Dustin (talk) 02:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
For seemingly the most controversial subject on his page, it looks like more users are editing rather than talking about this. Despite not being religious Sanders still identifies as a Jew, so can we at least come to an agreement not to change his infobox and just put the fine print in its corresponding article section? Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 21:02, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
The quote where he mentions Hitler is well over forty words, and therefore it's supposed to be in the form of a blockquote, per WP:BQ. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 23:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Dear editors,
I am restoring a discussion about the section on Bernie Sanders's political positions to the talk page. It had been archived, but it is particularly germane to the GA review I did, so I feel the discussion should be continued.
You can read the GA review here.
Regards,
-- Ravpapa ( talk) 13:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I note that users are making comments about the GA review on the review itself. I suggest that you keep all discussion of the points raised on this talk page, perhaps opening a separate section for each issue. This way all the discussion will be on the talk page.
I am copying the comments in the review to here, so discussion can continue. Regards, -- Ravpapa ( talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Are there any sources that say that Sanders practices Judaism..? You can be Jewish without practicing the religion since it's an Ethnoreligion. Sanders has stated that he's "not particularly religious" which is why I had him as Irreligious until I was reverted. Prcc27 ( talk) 00:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The latitude extended regarding interpreting that affirmation about God is strikingly broader than in normative Christianity and Islam. As for the bacon frying in mom's dairy sauce pan, I am reminded of the indisputably Jewish organization Hashomer Hatzair, and Bernie Sanders may possibly share an ideological affinity with them. The anecdote I remember about that group is that in the 1930s, they would have an annual picnic with ham sandwiches at the Western Wall in Jerusalem on Yom Kippur, the most solemn Jewish fast day. Such behavior was an all-out assault on Orthodox Jewish values, but they are still considered to be a Jewish group. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
For a person to be Jewish, they must be born of a Jewish mother or converted to the Jewish religion. For sources, can one cite a Wikipedia article as the source for another Wikipedia article ("All Jewish religious movements agree that a person may be a Jew either by birth or through conversion." - /info/en/?search=Who_is_a_Jew%3F) or must it be a source outside of Wikipedia? If it has to be an outside source, what about this: "Gentiles might be surprised that for Jews by birth this traditional test makes no reference to faith or behaviour. Jews may be atheist (many are: apostasy is a venerable Jewish tradition) and still Jews." - http://www.economist.com/news/international/21593507-competing-answers-increasingly-pressing-question-who-jew. Since you did not question the assertion in the article that his mother is Jewish, then you have to accept that he's Jewish too, based on being born to a Jewish mother. If you have any further questions on his religion, you would have to question that of his mother's. - Jeff Corbett — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.232.30.80 ( talk) 18:19, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
"He continually won reelection with high margins, with his closest bid during the 1994 Republican Revolution, when he won by 3.3% with 49.8% of the vote."
I propose that a word such as "usually" or "often" be used instead of "continually" which is obviously inaccurate if he had that close call in one election.
"Continually" indicates an unbroken run of high margin wins, however, the last phrase of the sentence contradicts that notion.
I propose that instead of making the simple edit myself since this article seems to be locked against alteration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.119.204.117 ( talk) 00:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
I do not believe that we need to use both a block quote and then again use the same quote in the sources. I am referring to this from the refs section:
'I’m proud to be Jewish,' the Independent from Vermont – and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination – responded Thursday at a press breakfast hosted by the Monitor. Though, he added, 'I’m not particularly religious.' As a child, Sanders said, being Jewish taught him 'in a very deep way what politics is about. A guy named Adolf Hitler won an election in 1932,' the senator said. 'He won an election, and 50 million people died as a result of that election in World War II, including 6 million Jews. So what I learned as a little kid is that politics is, in fact, very important.'
I do not even care for the use of the block quote in the first place. It is the only block quote used in his bio which to me suggests that it is of great importance, when actually it was a strong reply to the rumor that he held dual Israli-US citizenship. The suggestion that it is over 40 words does not hold up very well since it is very close and in fact there are only 30 words if one does not include one and two letter words. To me even just the block quote makes it seem as though this has been a driving force in his life and then to even mention it twice, in full no less!, is more like pandering for the Jewish vote. He's never repeated this in any speech or other interview that I'm aware of. Only Wikipedia makes such a big deal of it. IMO. Gandydancer ( talk) 14:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
There is no information on Bernie's time as an eligible draftee for the Vietnam war, nor what means he used to avoid being drafted. As he is running for President, and would be commander in chief, this is something that is important enough to merit at least a paragraph in his biography. All other Vietnam-era and draft-eligible (male) candidates bios have some mention of this. For instance, here is the relevant paragraph from Donald Trump's bio on Wikipedia:
Trump came of age for the draft during the Vietnam War. In an interview in 2011 on New York station WNYW,[19] he stated, "I actually got lucky because I had a very high draft number."[20] Selective Service records retrieved by The Smoking Gun website from the National Archives show that, although Trump did eventually receive a high selective service lottery number in 1969, he was not drafted earlier because of four student deferments (2-S) while attending college, and after receiving a medical deferment (1-Y, later converted to 4-F) obtained in 1968 after his college graduation, prior to the lottery being initiated.[21] Trump was deemed fit for service after a military medical examination in 1966, and was briefly classified as 1-A by a local draft board shortly before his 1968 medical disqualification.[22] Trump attributed his medical deferment to "heel spurs" in both feet, according to a 2015 biographer,[16] but told an Iowa campaign audience he suffered from a spur in one foot, though he could not remember which one.[22]
Can we put together the basic information on this and include it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.76.12 ( talk) 19:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
OK, Here is some proposed text for the topic:
Bernie Sanders came of age during the early Vietnam era, and was required to register for the draft in late 1959, following his 18th birthday. At the time both student deferments and marriage deferments were available, and Bernie took advantage of them to avoid service in Vietnam, which was ramping up during his period of eligibility. When President Kennedy ended the marriage deferment in 1963 Bernie applied for conscientious objector status. His application was eventually denied, but by that time he was too old to still be eligible for the draft. [1]
References
The Wiki article on Burlington College indicates his wife was president of the college from 2004–2011, i.e. "2004-2011 Dr. Jane O'Meara Sanders". They married in 1988, so that she served as president during, not before, her marriage to Bernie Sanders. Please correct the error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.21.216.202 ( talk) 23:17, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
The photo caption that says "Sanders campaigning in Arizona" is incorrect. It should say "Sanders campaigning in Louisiana". Source: /info/en/?search=File:Bernie_Sanders_%2820033841412_24d8796e44_c0%29.jpg Steve Karp ( talk) 07:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
I saw this edit and was wondering if a person is considered an alumnus of the institution if they transfer away after only a year of study. Does anyone know? Airplaneman ✈ 18:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Does Bernie have a middle name? The article doesn't list one.-- Solomonfromfinland ( talk) 23:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
"General points on linking style", which is part of the manual of style, says, "Items within quotations should not generally be linked; instead, consider placing the relevant links in the surrounding text or in the "See also" section of the article." While we do not put "democratic socialist" in quotes, I think the same principle applies. The article democratic socialism refers to a specific version of socialism, while the expression itself can be used to refer to various versions. I do not think we should judge what Sanders means and therefore will remove the link. TFD ( talk) 19:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
I recently created a new section called "Accusation of minimum wage hypocrisy" where I added the following:
In 2015, conservatives accused Sanders of hypocrisy because he paid his interns $12 an hour while advocating raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. [1] [2] [3] [4]
User:Calidum erased it and commented "Not appropriate."
I am interested in hearing what other editors think of including or not including this information.
Autoerotic Mummification ( talk) 03:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request to
Bernie Sanders has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I believe it should be added and emphasized that some people, even though he calls himself a democratic socialist, consider him to actually be a social democrat. [12] [13] I assume, back then, the terms were used interchangeably. By reading the articles on Wikipedia on both terms, a lot of people might get confused. Bernie has so far not mentioned anything about implementing a socialist economy. He has mentioned taxing Wall Street speculation, and putting the money towards education. [14] That is something social democrats would advocate. He has not talked about banning such practice. That is something socialists would do. The Democratic Socialists of America's own constitution points this out: "We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality and non-oppressive relationships." Also, he points at Scandinavia as examples of his policies working in other countries, but as it is already stated in the article, Scandinavia countries have social democratic ideologies and not democratic socialism. The American Conservative calls him a "welfarist", but I believe that to also be incorrect. Bernie is a social democrat...
References
Phernandezlima ( talk) 05:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV "Biased statements of opinion can be presented only with attribution." However, under the section Bernie Sanders, U.S. House of Representatives, Tenure the opinion of Rep. Frank was paraphrased without direct attribution; only a footnote was provided. The quote should be clarified. Crayz9000 ( talk) 02:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Someone has added "universalism" as a religion to the infobox. Two sources are provided, both versions of the same article. I see the "universalism" thing as a throw-away word by a headline writer. For a religion, we need an explicit self-identification in a reliable source. Sanders calls himself "Religion:Jewish" in his press packet. Unless someone can furnish a similar self-identification as a universalist, I intend to remove that. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:35, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I agree take it out. Also whats up with the nationality being listed as American. Shouldn't it be American/Polish or just Polish seeing his dad is from there. He even uses "polish" in his campaign video , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwwwn9zHT-8 . AlaskanNativeRU ( talk) 05:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
His father and their whole side was still from Poland, which would make his nationality polish though, American seems a little off AlaskanNativeRU ( talk) 06:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that undue weight is being given to these SNL skits. They make up the entire section. The skits are already mentioned on the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, 2016 article in a similar section, which I have no problem with (except that it should be expanded to include other instances of Bernie in popular media). They seem oddly out of place here on a biographical article that should be succinct and contain only the most relevant content.-- C.J. Griffin ( talk) 22:15, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Here is how it is presented in the run for pres article:
Saturday Night Live highlighted Sanders in its October 17, 2015, cold open with “ Seinfeld” writer Larry David portraying him in SNL's parody [1] of the first Democratic Primary Presidential debate that had aired on CNN October 13. David returned to the show for the first time in 30 years to portray Sanders. [2] His impression of Sanders, widely received on Twitter as very favorable, had him waving his arms and saying: “I’m going to dial it right up to a ten: We’re doomed! We need a revolution! We’ve got millions of people in the streets. We gotta do something and we gotta do it now”. [2]
I just loved the segment and think it to be well-presented here but It does not seem appropriate for his bio, to me... Gandydancer ( talk) 01:30, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
References
![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
I've set the Political positions of Bernie Sanders article to redirect to the political positions section of this article. I did this because there was never consensus to migrate Bernie's political positions to a separate article, and the political positions article was essentially a carbon copy of what is included here on the main article. Of course, inconsistency between the two was starting to arise because people would edit here and not there or vice-versa. HappyWanderer15 ( talk) 11:51, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
A fuller treatment of any major subtopic should go in a separate article of its own. The original article should contain a section with a summary of the subtopic's article as well as a link to it. For copyright purposes the first edit summary of a subtopic article formed by cutting text out of a main article should link back to the original. It is advisable to develop new material in a subtopic before summarizing it in the main article. Templates are available to link to subtopics and to tag synchronization problems between a summary and an article it summarizes.
Also, WP:SPLIT is more appropriate for this article:
If an article becomes too large, or a section of an article has a length that is out of proportion to the rest of the article, it is often appropriate for some or all of the article to be split into new articles. In some cases, refactoring an article into child or sister articles can allow subtopics to be discussed more fully elsewhere without dominating a general overview article to which they are non-central (but only if the new articles are themselves sufficiently notable to be included in the encyclopedia).
The reason it makes sense to remove the redirect is to slim down what is already a huge section in the main Bernie Sanders article. One thing that can be done is just summarizing what Political positions of Bernie Sanders says in the main article. Buffaboy talk 20:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I've summarized Sanders' main positions and combined the information from this article with the information on the political positions article. This is something that was going to have to happen at some stage, so we might as well insure consistency now. Please feel free to improve and expand (but not too much!) HappyWanderer15 ( talk) 09:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I think its getting to the point where we should split off the political positions section into its own article titled Political positions of Bernie Sanders (currently a redirect) and rewrite the section in summery style. The reason for this is that Sanders political positions are getting significant media attention because of his presidential bid. The coverage of his political positions will only grow as time goes on and will require more detail for completeness that can be covered in its own article. What are peoples thoughts on the subject? Winner 42 Talk to me! 04:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I think that we need to commit to one approach or the other at this stage. There has been a separate political positions article created that has almost identical content to the main article. From this point on the potential exists for inconsistency between the two pages. I propose including a paragraph-form summary, which I would be happy to write, in the main article with a link to the political positions page for more detail. HappyWanderer15 ( talk) 11:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I litterally see no reason to split bernie's wikipedia page up except to make it more difficult to find his positions. Are people really complaining the scroll bar is too long on his page? If anything, it's too short. Other candidates have much bigger pages so logically, it does not seem consistent to do some sort of preemptive strike against his policy positions. I mean, is the reason this http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Constitutional%20Amendment%20FAQs.pdf isn't mentioned in the wikipedia page because of lack of space? no? If we really want to make a 2nd page (no reason to, but if we did want to) full of policy positions, we should fill THIS page the people expect to see policy positions on AND THEN if people complain, and only then, that it's too much to read, seperate it after discussing it with everyone in a deliberate manner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandirs ( talk • contribs) 05:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Allow me to quote: (copy-pasted textwall removed (I think its getting to the point where [...] seperate it after discussing it with everyone in a deliberate manner.) 184.101.251.129 ( talk) 19:37, 15 August 2015 (UTC))
We had a discussion about splitting off policy positions, nobody supported it because that isn't how wikipedia works. Someone removed policy positions anyway. You realize when you try and HIDE the truth from people obviously it makes them really really cool when they tell their friends in small groups? There isn't even a link to his policy positions on this page. The bias is emberrassingly obvious. Sorry billionaires, but if you had contributed to wikipedia more in the past at some point you would have known what a wiki-entry really looks like. It isn't just people agreeing with each other, they use logic and past precedent to decide if something is actually worthy of it's own article split off or if that is more of a 'silence' tactic by someone who is trying to make him less popular to the people? have you even met someone who hasn't been to one of his rallies yet? like seriously. #feelthebern — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandirs ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The fact that he's running for the highest political office in the United States should be noted in the opening paragraph. OrganicEarth ( talk) 04:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Seriously, you don't think Bernie Sanders is notable as a presidential candidate? Are you living on another planet? He's cleaning Hillary Clinton's clock int he polls. She draws hundreds at speeches, he draws thousands. Nobody except the people in New England had ever heard of Bernie before he announced his run for the presidency. He's not notable as the junior senator he's notable as a presidential candidate beating Hillary in the polls. SW3 5DL ( talk) 22:51, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
See WP:CANVASS. Don't use your buddies to edit war for you. SW3 5DL ( talk) 03:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
could we at least get the TERMS right here? lead sentence is lead sentence, not "lede...". "THE lede", otoh, is a special (historic) spelling, used mainly with "bury...".
it is a common mistake to use "lead" in that expression, but the converse -- "lede sentence" -- is a new one on me!
if u mean sentence CONTAINING "the lede", ok, then, it's actually not wrong. if, otoh, u mean FIRST SENTENCE -- as i suspect u do -- it's most definitely "lead". 209.172.23.221 ( talk) 02:02, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Rick_Perry#RFC_about_whether_his_presidential_candidacy_should_be_mentioned_in_the_lead_paragraph Anythingyouwant ( talk) 15:38, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
any particular reason my question here about his FAMILY was removed? just how is it that bernie is a yank while his brother a brit?
i am insinuating nothing with my question -- i am flat-out CURIOUS. did his parents live in the UK before bernie was born, or did his brother emigrate as an adult? 209.172.23.221 ( talk) 02:10, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
References
Does anyone have the time to find a few copy right free images, especially any of Bernie and the crowd at his talk in Maine? I did a quick search early this morning but didn't find anything. Maybe someone else will have better luck. Thanks. SW3 5DL ( talk) 18:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Why dont we just take some images of him from his campaign website? I am sure his team won't mind. Darkninja505 ( talk) 17:19, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
I believe that we have too many head shot photos of Sanders in the article. I'd like to remove two of them: 1) the photo added most recently is about the same vintage as his official photo and is a tad odd in that his hands are out of focus and 2) the extreme closeup taken in 2015 does nothing more than show the reader what he looks like - something not needed since we have plenty of photos already that have been taken over the years. (Unless, of course, someone could find a really old one from when he still had that head of curly hair. :)) Any disagreements to removing those two photos? Gandydancer ( talk) 12:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Recently an editor added:
"A guy named Adolf Hitler won an election in 1932. He won an election, and 50 million people died as a result of that election in World War II, including 6 million Jews. So what I learned as a little kid is that politics is, in fact, very important.”
Another editor made it into a block quote.
IMO this is just too much. Block quotes have the power to make a statement seem to be something that is of very high importance in the article, especially when it's the only one in a section, and this is not a highlight of his early life and education. Even though this information is already included in one of the splits, I can go along with including it, but to use a block quote gives it more importance than it warrants. Thoughts? Gandydancer ( talk) 14:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Jewish:
Judaism
Now please disregard what format news sources use and tell me whether the name of the religion we are discussing is "Jewish" or "Judaism". Do followers of said religion practice Jewish, or do they practice Judaism? Dustin (talk) 02:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh, and with regard to the earlier discussion, if we are not using the parameter to denote the religion, then it should not be in the infobox. Dustin (talk) 02:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
For seemingly the most controversial subject on his page, it looks like more users are editing rather than talking about this. Despite not being religious Sanders still identifies as a Jew, so can we at least come to an agreement not to change his infobox and just put the fine print in its corresponding article section? Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 21:02, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
The quote where he mentions Hitler is well over forty words, and therefore it's supposed to be in the form of a blockquote, per WP:BQ. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 23:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Dear editors,
I am restoring a discussion about the section on Bernie Sanders's political positions to the talk page. It had been archived, but it is particularly germane to the GA review I did, so I feel the discussion should be continued.
You can read the GA review here.
Regards,
-- Ravpapa ( talk) 13:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I note that users are making comments about the GA review on the review itself. I suggest that you keep all discussion of the points raised on this talk page, perhaps opening a separate section for each issue. This way all the discussion will be on the talk page.
I am copying the comments in the review to here, so discussion can continue. Regards, -- Ravpapa ( talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Are there any sources that say that Sanders practices Judaism..? You can be Jewish without practicing the religion since it's an Ethnoreligion. Sanders has stated that he's "not particularly religious" which is why I had him as Irreligious until I was reverted. Prcc27 ( talk) 00:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
The latitude extended regarding interpreting that affirmation about God is strikingly broader than in normative Christianity and Islam. As for the bacon frying in mom's dairy sauce pan, I am reminded of the indisputably Jewish organization Hashomer Hatzair, and Bernie Sanders may possibly share an ideological affinity with them. The anecdote I remember about that group is that in the 1930s, they would have an annual picnic with ham sandwiches at the Western Wall in Jerusalem on Yom Kippur, the most solemn Jewish fast day. Such behavior was an all-out assault on Orthodox Jewish values, but they are still considered to be a Jewish group. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
For a person to be Jewish, they must be born of a Jewish mother or converted to the Jewish religion. For sources, can one cite a Wikipedia article as the source for another Wikipedia article ("All Jewish religious movements agree that a person may be a Jew either by birth or through conversion." - /info/en/?search=Who_is_a_Jew%3F) or must it be a source outside of Wikipedia? If it has to be an outside source, what about this: "Gentiles might be surprised that for Jews by birth this traditional test makes no reference to faith or behaviour. Jews may be atheist (many are: apostasy is a venerable Jewish tradition) and still Jews." - http://www.economist.com/news/international/21593507-competing-answers-increasingly-pressing-question-who-jew. Since you did not question the assertion in the article that his mother is Jewish, then you have to accept that he's Jewish too, based on being born to a Jewish mother. If you have any further questions on his religion, you would have to question that of his mother's. - Jeff Corbett — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.232.30.80 ( talk) 18:19, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
"He continually won reelection with high margins, with his closest bid during the 1994 Republican Revolution, when he won by 3.3% with 49.8% of the vote."
I propose that a word such as "usually" or "often" be used instead of "continually" which is obviously inaccurate if he had that close call in one election.
"Continually" indicates an unbroken run of high margin wins, however, the last phrase of the sentence contradicts that notion.
I propose that instead of making the simple edit myself since this article seems to be locked against alteration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.119.204.117 ( talk) 00:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
I do not believe that we need to use both a block quote and then again use the same quote in the sources. I am referring to this from the refs section:
'I’m proud to be Jewish,' the Independent from Vermont – and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination – responded Thursday at a press breakfast hosted by the Monitor. Though, he added, 'I’m not particularly religious.' As a child, Sanders said, being Jewish taught him 'in a very deep way what politics is about. A guy named Adolf Hitler won an election in 1932,' the senator said. 'He won an election, and 50 million people died as a result of that election in World War II, including 6 million Jews. So what I learned as a little kid is that politics is, in fact, very important.'
I do not even care for the use of the block quote in the first place. It is the only block quote used in his bio which to me suggests that it is of great importance, when actually it was a strong reply to the rumor that he held dual Israli-US citizenship. The suggestion that it is over 40 words does not hold up very well since it is very close and in fact there are only 30 words if one does not include one and two letter words. To me even just the block quote makes it seem as though this has been a driving force in his life and then to even mention it twice, in full no less!, is more like pandering for the Jewish vote. He's never repeated this in any speech or other interview that I'm aware of. Only Wikipedia makes such a big deal of it. IMO. Gandydancer ( talk) 14:23, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
There is no information on Bernie's time as an eligible draftee for the Vietnam war, nor what means he used to avoid being drafted. As he is running for President, and would be commander in chief, this is something that is important enough to merit at least a paragraph in his biography. All other Vietnam-era and draft-eligible (male) candidates bios have some mention of this. For instance, here is the relevant paragraph from Donald Trump's bio on Wikipedia:
Trump came of age for the draft during the Vietnam War. In an interview in 2011 on New York station WNYW,[19] he stated, "I actually got lucky because I had a very high draft number."[20] Selective Service records retrieved by The Smoking Gun website from the National Archives show that, although Trump did eventually receive a high selective service lottery number in 1969, he was not drafted earlier because of four student deferments (2-S) while attending college, and after receiving a medical deferment (1-Y, later converted to 4-F) obtained in 1968 after his college graduation, prior to the lottery being initiated.[21] Trump was deemed fit for service after a military medical examination in 1966, and was briefly classified as 1-A by a local draft board shortly before his 1968 medical disqualification.[22] Trump attributed his medical deferment to "heel spurs" in both feet, according to a 2015 biographer,[16] but told an Iowa campaign audience he suffered from a spur in one foot, though he could not remember which one.[22]
Can we put together the basic information on this and include it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.76.12 ( talk) 19:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
OK, Here is some proposed text for the topic:
Bernie Sanders came of age during the early Vietnam era, and was required to register for the draft in late 1959, following his 18th birthday. At the time both student deferments and marriage deferments were available, and Bernie took advantage of them to avoid service in Vietnam, which was ramping up during his period of eligibility. When President Kennedy ended the marriage deferment in 1963 Bernie applied for conscientious objector status. His application was eventually denied, but by that time he was too old to still be eligible for the draft. [1]
References
The Wiki article on Burlington College indicates his wife was president of the college from 2004–2011, i.e. "2004-2011 Dr. Jane O'Meara Sanders". They married in 1988, so that she served as president during, not before, her marriage to Bernie Sanders. Please correct the error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.21.216.202 ( talk) 23:17, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
The photo caption that says "Sanders campaigning in Arizona" is incorrect. It should say "Sanders campaigning in Louisiana". Source: /info/en/?search=File:Bernie_Sanders_%2820033841412_24d8796e44_c0%29.jpg Steve Karp ( talk) 07:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
I saw this edit and was wondering if a person is considered an alumnus of the institution if they transfer away after only a year of study. Does anyone know? Airplaneman ✈ 18:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Does Bernie have a middle name? The article doesn't list one.-- Solomonfromfinland ( talk) 23:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
"General points on linking style", which is part of the manual of style, says, "Items within quotations should not generally be linked; instead, consider placing the relevant links in the surrounding text or in the "See also" section of the article." While we do not put "democratic socialist" in quotes, I think the same principle applies. The article democratic socialism refers to a specific version of socialism, while the expression itself can be used to refer to various versions. I do not think we should judge what Sanders means and therefore will remove the link. TFD ( talk) 19:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
I recently created a new section called "Accusation of minimum wage hypocrisy" where I added the following:
In 2015, conservatives accused Sanders of hypocrisy because he paid his interns $12 an hour while advocating raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. [1] [2] [3] [4]
User:Calidum erased it and commented "Not appropriate."
I am interested in hearing what other editors think of including or not including this information.
Autoerotic Mummification ( talk) 03:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request to
Bernie Sanders has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I believe it should be added and emphasized that some people, even though he calls himself a democratic socialist, consider him to actually be a social democrat. [12] [13] I assume, back then, the terms were used interchangeably. By reading the articles on Wikipedia on both terms, a lot of people might get confused. Bernie has so far not mentioned anything about implementing a socialist economy. He has mentioned taxing Wall Street speculation, and putting the money towards education. [14] That is something social democrats would advocate. He has not talked about banning such practice. That is something socialists would do. The Democratic Socialists of America's own constitution points this out: "We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality and non-oppressive relationships." Also, he points at Scandinavia as examples of his policies working in other countries, but as it is already stated in the article, Scandinavia countries have social democratic ideologies and not democratic socialism. The American Conservative calls him a "welfarist", but I believe that to also be incorrect. Bernie is a social democrat...
References
Phernandezlima ( talk) 05:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV "Biased statements of opinion can be presented only with attribution." However, under the section Bernie Sanders, U.S. House of Representatives, Tenure the opinion of Rep. Frank was paraphrased without direct attribution; only a footnote was provided. The quote should be clarified. Crayz9000 ( talk) 02:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Someone has added "universalism" as a religion to the infobox. Two sources are provided, both versions of the same article. I see the "universalism" thing as a throw-away word by a headline writer. For a religion, we need an explicit self-identification in a reliable source. Sanders calls himself "Religion:Jewish" in his press packet. Unless someone can furnish a similar self-identification as a universalist, I intend to remove that. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:35, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I agree take it out. Also whats up with the nationality being listed as American. Shouldn't it be American/Polish or just Polish seeing his dad is from there. He even uses "polish" in his campaign video , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwwwn9zHT-8 . AlaskanNativeRU ( talk) 05:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
His father and their whole side was still from Poland, which would make his nationality polish though, American seems a little off AlaskanNativeRU ( talk) 06:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that undue weight is being given to these SNL skits. They make up the entire section. The skits are already mentioned on the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, 2016 article in a similar section, which I have no problem with (except that it should be expanded to include other instances of Bernie in popular media). They seem oddly out of place here on a biographical article that should be succinct and contain only the most relevant content.-- C.J. Griffin ( talk) 22:15, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Here is how it is presented in the run for pres article:
Saturday Night Live highlighted Sanders in its October 17, 2015, cold open with “ Seinfeld” writer Larry David portraying him in SNL's parody [1] of the first Democratic Primary Presidential debate that had aired on CNN October 13. David returned to the show for the first time in 30 years to portray Sanders. [2] His impression of Sanders, widely received on Twitter as very favorable, had him waving his arms and saying: “I’m going to dial it right up to a ten: We’re doomed! We need a revolution! We’ve got millions of people in the streets. We gotta do something and we gotta do it now”. [2]
I just loved the segment and think it to be well-presented here but It does not seem appropriate for his bio, to me... Gandydancer ( talk) 01:30, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
References