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 |
Maybe not so much disputed facts as much as it is just plain lack of facts. This article largely falls into WP:CRYSTAL territory and feels like it is just a bit too soon but maybe this is just me. Yes article will need to exist but it is largely speculative right now. EoRdE6( Come Talk to Me!) 03:07, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
There are WAY too many names listed on this page. The New York Times has a shortlist for most offices here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/politics/donald-trump-administration.html
We should change the list to reflect that. Computermichael ( talk) 19:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Aren't we pretty certain that Christie has no chance to be atty general? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.0.133 ( talk) 04:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I propose that the tables track the status of each candidate through the nomination process, specifically, that an individual not be deleted like this but rather shown as no longer under consideration, or finally was confirmed by congress. That way the article can remain as a record rather than just withering away. - Brianhe ( talk) 14:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
For the sake of preventing the development of an article so long it's hard to go through, limiting the candidates to those mentioned by the Trump campaign repeatedly as viable should be listed. If we list all speculations by the media, the article becomes too long, too confusing and fails to inform the reader of who is likely to get the position. Just my two cents. Computermichael ( talk) 22:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to list all candidates with any chance at all we need to switch to smaller info boxes without the 70px images. Computermichael ( talk)
Just received news from the New York Times that Jeff Sessions has been selected for Attorney General. Should I add it in or just wait a little? Burklemore1 ( talk) 13:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/us/politics/jeff-sessions-donald-trump-attorney-general.html?_r=0
Should we restrict included names to those with Wiki articles of their own? It seems like every possible name mentioned anywhere is getting included now. Therequiembellishere ( talk) 23:53, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Should we have a clear criterion for what should be listed in this section? One possibility would be officials on Level II of the Executive Schedule that are not deputies? Antony–22 ( talk⁄ contribs) 22:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Since this article is called Cabinet of Donald Trump and will presumably have the contents moved to the equivalent of Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet and Cabinet of the United States after confirmations begin, then it seems like a good idea to prune some of the non-cabinet level positions that are currently in this list (Deputy Secretary, etc.) It seems like we should be consistent with how we define these positions between administrations; if a certain deputy secretary position wasn't notable enough to be in the existing Cabinet list before (because as far as I know, deputy positions are not Cabinet-level), then they shouldn't be listed here. I do not have a dog in this fight so to speak, but I noticed the large amount of non-Cabinet level positions while viewing recent changes and thought it something the people more interested in this article should discuss. -- Mr. Vernon ( talk) 05:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't care about Mr.Vernon ok!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marine678 ( talk • contribs) 13:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
We could make this page contain all Level II and above positions in the existing table formats, and rename page Incoming Administration of Donald Trump, and when Cabinet is sworn in, move Cabinet-level positions to Cabinet of the United States? Ollie035 ( talk) 03:56, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
I have created a new page, List of Donald Trump political appointments, as suggested by Antony-22, where all appointments made by President-Elect Trump can be placed. Therefore, only cabinet positions need to be on this page. Ollie035 ( talk) 06:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
As the table of Cabinet members and Cabinet-level appointees was repeated in several articles, I created a template {{ Cabinet of Donald Trump}} from one of those pages. This will facilitate updates in a central location. Please feel free to add citations or new information there. — JFG talk 15:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
What happened to Flynn and Pompeo? Interlaker ( talk) 23:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Donald Trump Jr. is mentioned as a possible candidate for the Secretary of the Interior. Our article Cabinet of the United States states however that "Under 5 U.S.C. § 3110, federal officials are prohibited from appointing their immediate family members to certain governmental positions, including those in the Cabinet. Passed in 1967, this law was a congressional response in delayed dismay about John F. Kennedy's appointment of his brother Robert F. Kennedy to the office of the Attorney General." So Trump Jr. can't be appointed or have i missed something? Or is it so that if reliable sources report that he is one of the candidates then we have no alternative than to include him in this article as well?...Actually I read the source given (TPM article) which uses the phrase "reportedly has interest in the job" and then links to a Politico-article where it is said that Trump Jr. "is said to be interested in the job". Does a rumour about his possible interest make him a "candidate" when he actually can't be appointed anyway. I don't know. K347 ( talk) 13:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Some of these descriptions are getting a little POV ... "climate change denalist" is iffy without serious sourcing. Here's another, Flynn is described as an RT analyst, but factcheck.org states plainly "Flynn is not “on the payroll of the Russia Times." [1] WP needs to remain high-quality and neutral in this matter. Recent refactoring of citations by an editor with a provocative name isn't helping. - Brianhe ( talk) 17:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
The Wall Street Journal had a comment about the difficulty of making lists like these. An anon editor removed it twice [2] [3] and possibly thought that discussing a brain trust was a problem. I don't want to edit war but I disagree and think this is a terrific inclusion. Am suggesting here that a third party evaluate it for re-inclusion. - Brianhe ( talk) 17:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Due to an anonymous user reversing substantial edits to this page in recent days, I propose that this page is semi-protected to protect the efforts of confirmed Wikipedia users in editing this page. Many changes to the tables and position on this page have been reverted, and now the new article List of Donald Trump political appointments has been undermined by the readdition of other high-level positions and potential candidates to this page. I know myself and others spent a lot of time on improving this page, and do not want other anonymous users to do the same. There is my vent, what do you think about semi-protecting this page??? Ollie035 ( talk) 04:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Which Hunter is it? Theoallen1 ( talk) 01:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Any reason why? - Blakebs ( talk) 06:02, 29 November 2016 (CST)
Politico is reporting that Gary Cohn is being considered for Office of Management and the Budget. http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2016/11/trump-could-pick-goldman-sachs-president-231995 Benwitt ( talk) 16:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Benwitt Benwitt ( talk) 16:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Cabinet of Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please see the announcement here -> [5] for Trumps picks today and update the article. President-elect Donald J. Trump today announced his intent to nominate Steven Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross & Todd Ricketts. Octoberwoodland ( talk) 19:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Cabinet of Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Wilbur Ross should be added as commerce to this list: sources: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article117896743.html, http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/29/investing/wilbur-ross-donald-trump-commerce/index.html Benwitt ( talk) 14:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC) http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-11-29/mnuchin-said-to-be-trump-s-pick-for-treasury-secretary
As far as I can tell, the equivalent article for Barack Obama is Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet (redirect from Cabinet of Barack Obama). Wondering if the article should follow the similar format, including the name of the article, to maintain a consistency between the two articles covering a similar topic. Calibrador ( talk) 21:45, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Would someone add, either in the introduction or in a new section entitled something like "Political alignment":
Here is the source: Restuccia, Andrew; Cook, Nancy; Woellert, Lorraine (November 30, 2016). "Trump's Conservative Dream Team". Politico. Retrieved November 30, 2016. -- 1990'sguy ( talk) 01:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
James Mattis is not from Washington DC, but rather from Washington State. He was born in Pullman, and is a current resident of Benton County. Source: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/local/article116590898.html -cashorczech — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cashorczech ( talk • contribs) 03:58, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Why is Ben Carson listed as "from Florida"? Pretty sure he ran as a Marylander during the Primaries. Inspector Semenych ( talk) 21:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Mnuchin's photograph appears blank. Please fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.167.190 ( talk) 18:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
What happened to the picture of Ross? Plzwork1122 ( talk) 19:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Someone add this, it's out in the news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.51.16 ( talk) 23:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't see anything obvious in the article history that would merit the page being fully protected and only editable by admins. Given the fast-paced nature of breaking news regarding confirmed appointments, as well as the lower sections regarding candidates for each position, I believe it to be very detrimental to allow only admins to edit the page, as information could quickly become outdated. If there is an issue with a single IP user, or multiple IP users, then the page should be semi-protected, but this full-protection seems like someone stepped over their boundaries in protecting an article that shouldn't be protected. Calibrador ( talk) 00:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Isn't this article a breach of WP:RECENTISM? We don't have an article called Proposed cabinet of Barack Obama or Proposed cabinet of George W. Bush, etc. I'm guessing that this article & a few other Trump related articles will be eventually deleted, after the inauguration. At the very least, this article should be re-direct to Presidency of Donald Trump. -- GoodDay ( talk) 18:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
This bit was removed by PalmerLake2 without an edit-summary, and the pending change accepted by Jdavi333, presumably on the basis of Citation Needed (since the prose has no cites and sounds pretty opinionated).
Due to Trump's lack of government or military experience and reportedly fluid political positions, much interest existed among the media over his cabinet nominations, as they are believed to show how Trump plans to govern.
Now that more than a dozen of the cabinet members have been selected, is it time to rework the response-to-the-cabinet portion of this article properly? The cited stuff currently there is from Nov 30th, Dec 9th, Dec 15th, Dec 15th, Dec 5th, Dec 8th, Dec 13th. Which is pretty recent. I would like to add some material about the large number of generals, the large number of non-politicians, the large number of millionaires/billionaires, and a few other things which I've found cites for, but I figured I would open this talkpage section about the removal, before I start adding in new stuff. 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 20:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
that all articles that link to this one, that is to say the articles of the various possible nominees, be given some level of protection. Red editors are popping up all over the place, assuming both pro and anti stances and at the same time there are plenty of series wikipedia editors willing to take almost any possible position in the serious wikipedia editing tradition. I see that in this article a red linked editor has undone an edit from three different blue link editors. I have not looked to see what it is about, but, well, you get the idea. So what are the pros and cons of asking for protection? Carptrash ( talk) 19:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Being on the road with a car that I believe has just gone belly-up two hours away will somewhat limit my ability to edit, but it also generally increases my desire to be a dick,so, we'll see. Carptrash ( talk) 21:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Trump announced his intentions to nominate her for Secretary of the Interior and she was included on the chart, so where is she? -- TDKR Chicago 101 ( talk) 04:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Zinke is nominated now https://twitter.com/transition2017/status/809417386554261504. Please write him in. -- 2A02:908:1962:6E80:6460:CC4C:7903:D835 ( talk) 15:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Steve Bannon should be included for reasons of equalivency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theoallen1 ( talk • contribs) 21:54, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Should this newly created cabinet post be listed in the article on Trump's Cabinet? Comments welcome. I don't see any mention of it. [12] Octoberwoodland ( talk) 05:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
No idea what this yellow checkmark in the list of potential picks section means, please indicate this in the article or remove the yellow checkmark. Calibrador ( talk) 15:18, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Currently we have the following:
I would like to change to the following... I've moved things around but did NOT renumber yet so that where I moved something from is slightly clearer:
In short, I want to move the confirmation-hearings up to right below the main nominees-table, and merge the possible-candidates-sections into one big former-contenders section (which is ordered by succession rather than by nominee-announcement-date). Ping Zbase4, Classicwiki, Brianhe, Snickers2686, Marine678, Baghul3000, Champion, JFG, Jay942942, Tristan Surtel, Benwitt, who either I noticed in the history-tab for January making non-rvv edits or whom I remember (fondly :-) from last year on this article. Any objections, constructive criticism, etc? 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 00:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I have made a couple of the suggested changes: moved the confirmation-hearings up to just under the main splashpage section with the nominee-pictures, and merged the agriculture-and-CEA-contenders in with the others. However, all the contender-sections are still in chronological ordering, I did not yet attempt the change to succession-ordering. The article is still under pending changes, so I may get reverted prior to these bold changes going live. 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 17:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
The external links in the "testimony" column in the Confirmation process timeline section should either be moved to a reference, or removed altogether per WP:EL. I will not remove them and had I done that, I'm sure someone would have thrown a hissy fit. I'm writing here so someone can remove them. Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 23:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Now that Trump & Pence have assumed office, perhaps the article & template should be updated. GoodDay ( talk) 03:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
we show Betsy DeVos as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs candidate. Seems unlikely. Carptrash ( talk) 05:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
How about using another background color for the "Proposed Cabinet" listing as the individuals are confirmed?
user:mnw2000 14:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
user:mnw2000 20:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Why is this even being considered for inclusion? An offhand pejorative by a media outlet does not seem noteworthy in my opinion. It was only added earlier today by an ip6 user ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Cabinet_of_Donald_Trump&diff=762037759&oldid=762025806), and now editors are calling it censorship to remove it. ValarianB ( talk) 16:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
The VP, Mike Pence was highlighted in green, whose legend is "Individual officially confirmed by a full Senate vote (if required)" StandNThrow ( talk) 23:26, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Two consecutive sentences in different paragraphs in the "Analysis" section read, "The media also noted the fact that several of Trump's cabinet nominees politically opposed the federal departments they were selected to lead.[34] The Washington Post noted that Trump's cabinet is the wealthiest in modern American history in terms of total personal wealth.[35]" Both cites are to single Washington Post articles.
Article currently numbered [34] does not support the first sentence. It would support something like "The media has noted the fact that four of Trump's cabinet nominees politically opposed programs ran by the federal departments they were selected to lead." The sentence should be rewritten, better sourced, or deleted.
Sentence [35] supports the second sentence but is inaccurate. I believe that it is correct that Trump's cabinet is the wealthiest in modern American history in terms of total personal wealth. However, the article cited has specifically been derided by pretty much every other media outlet as untrue and biased (primarily based upon the including the wealth of Betsy DeVos' father-in-law in calculating the net worth of Betsy Devos). Thus, a new article should be used to support the sentence or the sentence should be deleted. Wilkyisdashiznit ( talk) 18:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Are the Cabinet-level positions we have listed here technically cabinet members now? Trump has announced his 24-cabinet member team... Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 17:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The "Full Senate vote date" column in this table is currently sorting incorrectly--it appears that the presence of citations for Steve Mnuchin, David Shulkin, and Linda McMahon's vote dates are to blame. Are these citations important enough that the sorting should be revamped to accommodate them, or should they be excised in order to fix the table? Rocio Nadat 01:26, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
The article states that Mike Pence was the first vice-President to break a tie on a confirmation vote. However, almost all the sources I have read state the Harry Truman broke a tie to confirm Henry Wallace as Secretary of Commerce in 1945. The wikipedia article was changed by a certain " 2602:30A:C0C7:48E0:B50F:32EE:E0E7:7ECF" on this account to comply with the "historic" nature of what Pence did (second is not has historic as first, don'cha know). What's going on? Arglebargle79 ( talk) 12:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The Cabinet Secretaries are consistently listed throughout the article in order based on when they were created, which matches their order of precedence and the presidential line of succession. The cabinet-level positions, however, are given in at least two different orders in the article, neither of which matches the order that was given in the White House's official announcement of who would be included in the President's cabinet. The White House ordering would seem to me to be the preferable one, but regardless there should be one consistent order adopted throughout the article. Thoughts? 107.145.77.108 ( talk) 02:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Why does the VP have a grey background, defined as "Individual officially confirmed with no Senate consent needed". Since he was elected and not confirmed by any body, senate or otherwise, should the background be left as white?
user:mnw2000 14:09, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
According to NPR the Senate has already confirmed Perry as Energy Sec -> [13]
Since Priebus is here under White House Chief of Staff, should there be the inclusion of McMaster as National Security Advisor and maybe even Spicer as White House Press (to even things out) in the Cabinet-level officials section? Just curious. -- TDKR Chicago 101 ( talk) 06:05, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
As this article has changed in size and scope since its inception, many of the sections of this talk page are no longer relevant. I propose we archive the first 35-40 sections of this talk page. Following Wikipedia:ARCHIVE, I will seek consensus first. Also please let me know if you prefer it to be done manually, by ClueBot III, or by lowercase sigmabot III. If there are no responses within a week, I will probably move ahead with archiving some of this talk page. This is just to ensure old conversations don't clog up this talk page. Classicwiki ( talk) 19:14, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
The following is a list of relevant items that I think can be included in the article that I think will help improve the quality and content of this page for future reference.
The above list of topics are all issues that were directly addressed in each nominee's confirmation hearing(s) and therefore are in line with this page's goal of documenting "the confirmation process for any successful or unsuccessful cabinet nominees of Donald Trump's administration." I hope this list can serve as an effective task list for editors looking to improve this article. I tried gathering some starting sources in advance to make the process easier. Please comment if you have objections. I hope to put up an additional list depending if improvements are made. Classicwiki ( talk) 07:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
I have been told that (obviously) a Secretary with one foot out the door trumps the nominee for the position in terms of the table embedded in the article. However, in the case of an Acting Secretary versus a Nominee (Matthew Whitaker vs William Barr) who do we include? During the Trump Transition period and his early presidency, it was nominees over acting officials, but now it seems the opposite. Which should we go by? Moonhawk736283 ( talk) 01:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
It's currently as of mid-September 2020 out of alignment.
-- 100.4.146.152 ( talk) 13:43, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Am I going insane or has the Ambassador to the UN position been completely removed from the cabinet section? Is there a reason for this? { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:44, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
It was downgraded from a cabinet position to a none cabinet position Marius1603 ( talk) 14:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Last name is spelled Chao. The Raid on capitol hill can be linked to the existing page on the 2021 storming of capitol hill. Negrong502 ( talk) 19:16, 7 January 2021 (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 1 |
Maybe not so much disputed facts as much as it is just plain lack of facts. This article largely falls into WP:CRYSTAL territory and feels like it is just a bit too soon but maybe this is just me. Yes article will need to exist but it is largely speculative right now. EoRdE6( Come Talk to Me!) 03:07, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
There are WAY too many names listed on this page. The New York Times has a shortlist for most offices here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/politics/donald-trump-administration.html
We should change the list to reflect that. Computermichael ( talk) 19:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Aren't we pretty certain that Christie has no chance to be atty general? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.0.133 ( talk) 04:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I propose that the tables track the status of each candidate through the nomination process, specifically, that an individual not be deleted like this but rather shown as no longer under consideration, or finally was confirmed by congress. That way the article can remain as a record rather than just withering away. - Brianhe ( talk) 14:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
For the sake of preventing the development of an article so long it's hard to go through, limiting the candidates to those mentioned by the Trump campaign repeatedly as viable should be listed. If we list all speculations by the media, the article becomes too long, too confusing and fails to inform the reader of who is likely to get the position. Just my two cents. Computermichael ( talk) 22:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to list all candidates with any chance at all we need to switch to smaller info boxes without the 70px images. Computermichael ( talk)
Just received news from the New York Times that Jeff Sessions has been selected for Attorney General. Should I add it in or just wait a little? Burklemore1 ( talk) 13:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/us/politics/jeff-sessions-donald-trump-attorney-general.html?_r=0
Should we restrict included names to those with Wiki articles of their own? It seems like every possible name mentioned anywhere is getting included now. Therequiembellishere ( talk) 23:53, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Should we have a clear criterion for what should be listed in this section? One possibility would be officials on Level II of the Executive Schedule that are not deputies? Antony–22 ( talk⁄ contribs) 22:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Since this article is called Cabinet of Donald Trump and will presumably have the contents moved to the equivalent of Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet and Cabinet of the United States after confirmations begin, then it seems like a good idea to prune some of the non-cabinet level positions that are currently in this list (Deputy Secretary, etc.) It seems like we should be consistent with how we define these positions between administrations; if a certain deputy secretary position wasn't notable enough to be in the existing Cabinet list before (because as far as I know, deputy positions are not Cabinet-level), then they shouldn't be listed here. I do not have a dog in this fight so to speak, but I noticed the large amount of non-Cabinet level positions while viewing recent changes and thought it something the people more interested in this article should discuss. -- Mr. Vernon ( talk) 05:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't care about Mr.Vernon ok!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marine678 ( talk • contribs) 13:52, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
We could make this page contain all Level II and above positions in the existing table formats, and rename page Incoming Administration of Donald Trump, and when Cabinet is sworn in, move Cabinet-level positions to Cabinet of the United States? Ollie035 ( talk) 03:56, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
I have created a new page, List of Donald Trump political appointments, as suggested by Antony-22, where all appointments made by President-Elect Trump can be placed. Therefore, only cabinet positions need to be on this page. Ollie035 ( talk) 06:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
As the table of Cabinet members and Cabinet-level appointees was repeated in several articles, I created a template {{ Cabinet of Donald Trump}} from one of those pages. This will facilitate updates in a central location. Please feel free to add citations or new information there. — JFG talk 15:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
What happened to Flynn and Pompeo? Interlaker ( talk) 23:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Donald Trump Jr. is mentioned as a possible candidate for the Secretary of the Interior. Our article Cabinet of the United States states however that "Under 5 U.S.C. § 3110, federal officials are prohibited from appointing their immediate family members to certain governmental positions, including those in the Cabinet. Passed in 1967, this law was a congressional response in delayed dismay about John F. Kennedy's appointment of his brother Robert F. Kennedy to the office of the Attorney General." So Trump Jr. can't be appointed or have i missed something? Or is it so that if reliable sources report that he is one of the candidates then we have no alternative than to include him in this article as well?...Actually I read the source given (TPM article) which uses the phrase "reportedly has interest in the job" and then links to a Politico-article where it is said that Trump Jr. "is said to be interested in the job". Does a rumour about his possible interest make him a "candidate" when he actually can't be appointed anyway. I don't know. K347 ( talk) 13:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Some of these descriptions are getting a little POV ... "climate change denalist" is iffy without serious sourcing. Here's another, Flynn is described as an RT analyst, but factcheck.org states plainly "Flynn is not “on the payroll of the Russia Times." [1] WP needs to remain high-quality and neutral in this matter. Recent refactoring of citations by an editor with a provocative name isn't helping. - Brianhe ( talk) 17:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
The Wall Street Journal had a comment about the difficulty of making lists like these. An anon editor removed it twice [2] [3] and possibly thought that discussing a brain trust was a problem. I don't want to edit war but I disagree and think this is a terrific inclusion. Am suggesting here that a third party evaluate it for re-inclusion. - Brianhe ( talk) 17:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Due to an anonymous user reversing substantial edits to this page in recent days, I propose that this page is semi-protected to protect the efforts of confirmed Wikipedia users in editing this page. Many changes to the tables and position on this page have been reverted, and now the new article List of Donald Trump political appointments has been undermined by the readdition of other high-level positions and potential candidates to this page. I know myself and others spent a lot of time on improving this page, and do not want other anonymous users to do the same. There is my vent, what do you think about semi-protecting this page??? Ollie035 ( talk) 04:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Which Hunter is it? Theoallen1 ( talk) 01:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Any reason why? - Blakebs ( talk) 06:02, 29 November 2016 (CST)
Politico is reporting that Gary Cohn is being considered for Office of Management and the Budget. http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2016/11/trump-could-pick-goldman-sachs-president-231995 Benwitt ( talk) 16:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Benwitt Benwitt ( talk) 16:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Cabinet of Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please see the announcement here -> [5] for Trumps picks today and update the article. President-elect Donald J. Trump today announced his intent to nominate Steven Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross & Todd Ricketts. Octoberwoodland ( talk) 19:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Cabinet of Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Wilbur Ross should be added as commerce to this list: sources: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article117896743.html, http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/29/investing/wilbur-ross-donald-trump-commerce/index.html Benwitt ( talk) 14:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC) http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-11-29/mnuchin-said-to-be-trump-s-pick-for-treasury-secretary
As far as I can tell, the equivalent article for Barack Obama is Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet (redirect from Cabinet of Barack Obama). Wondering if the article should follow the similar format, including the name of the article, to maintain a consistency between the two articles covering a similar topic. Calibrador ( talk) 21:45, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Would someone add, either in the introduction or in a new section entitled something like "Political alignment":
Here is the source: Restuccia, Andrew; Cook, Nancy; Woellert, Lorraine (November 30, 2016). "Trump's Conservative Dream Team". Politico. Retrieved November 30, 2016. -- 1990'sguy ( talk) 01:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
James Mattis is not from Washington DC, but rather from Washington State. He was born in Pullman, and is a current resident of Benton County. Source: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/local/article116590898.html -cashorczech — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cashorczech ( talk • contribs) 03:58, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Why is Ben Carson listed as "from Florida"? Pretty sure he ran as a Marylander during the Primaries. Inspector Semenych ( talk) 21:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Mnuchin's photograph appears blank. Please fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.167.190 ( talk) 18:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
What happened to the picture of Ross? Plzwork1122 ( talk) 19:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Someone add this, it's out in the news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.51.16 ( talk) 23:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't see anything obvious in the article history that would merit the page being fully protected and only editable by admins. Given the fast-paced nature of breaking news regarding confirmed appointments, as well as the lower sections regarding candidates for each position, I believe it to be very detrimental to allow only admins to edit the page, as information could quickly become outdated. If there is an issue with a single IP user, or multiple IP users, then the page should be semi-protected, but this full-protection seems like someone stepped over their boundaries in protecting an article that shouldn't be protected. Calibrador ( talk) 00:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Isn't this article a breach of WP:RECENTISM? We don't have an article called Proposed cabinet of Barack Obama or Proposed cabinet of George W. Bush, etc. I'm guessing that this article & a few other Trump related articles will be eventually deleted, after the inauguration. At the very least, this article should be re-direct to Presidency of Donald Trump. -- GoodDay ( talk) 18:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
This bit was removed by PalmerLake2 without an edit-summary, and the pending change accepted by Jdavi333, presumably on the basis of Citation Needed (since the prose has no cites and sounds pretty opinionated).
Due to Trump's lack of government or military experience and reportedly fluid political positions, much interest existed among the media over his cabinet nominations, as they are believed to show how Trump plans to govern.
Now that more than a dozen of the cabinet members have been selected, is it time to rework the response-to-the-cabinet portion of this article properly? The cited stuff currently there is from Nov 30th, Dec 9th, Dec 15th, Dec 15th, Dec 5th, Dec 8th, Dec 13th. Which is pretty recent. I would like to add some material about the large number of generals, the large number of non-politicians, the large number of millionaires/billionaires, and a few other things which I've found cites for, but I figured I would open this talkpage section about the removal, before I start adding in new stuff. 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 20:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
that all articles that link to this one, that is to say the articles of the various possible nominees, be given some level of protection. Red editors are popping up all over the place, assuming both pro and anti stances and at the same time there are plenty of series wikipedia editors willing to take almost any possible position in the serious wikipedia editing tradition. I see that in this article a red linked editor has undone an edit from three different blue link editors. I have not looked to see what it is about, but, well, you get the idea. So what are the pros and cons of asking for protection? Carptrash ( talk) 19:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Being on the road with a car that I believe has just gone belly-up two hours away will somewhat limit my ability to edit, but it also generally increases my desire to be a dick,so, we'll see. Carptrash ( talk) 21:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Trump announced his intentions to nominate her for Secretary of the Interior and she was included on the chart, so where is she? -- TDKR Chicago 101 ( talk) 04:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Zinke is nominated now https://twitter.com/transition2017/status/809417386554261504. Please write him in. -- 2A02:908:1962:6E80:6460:CC4C:7903:D835 ( talk) 15:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Steve Bannon should be included for reasons of equalivency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theoallen1 ( talk • contribs) 21:54, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Should this newly created cabinet post be listed in the article on Trump's Cabinet? Comments welcome. I don't see any mention of it. [12] Octoberwoodland ( talk) 05:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
No idea what this yellow checkmark in the list of potential picks section means, please indicate this in the article or remove the yellow checkmark. Calibrador ( talk) 15:18, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Currently we have the following:
I would like to change to the following... I've moved things around but did NOT renumber yet so that where I moved something from is slightly clearer:
In short, I want to move the confirmation-hearings up to right below the main nominees-table, and merge the possible-candidates-sections into one big former-contenders section (which is ordered by succession rather than by nominee-announcement-date). Ping Zbase4, Classicwiki, Brianhe, Snickers2686, Marine678, Baghul3000, Champion, JFG, Jay942942, Tristan Surtel, Benwitt, who either I noticed in the history-tab for January making non-rvv edits or whom I remember (fondly :-) from last year on this article. Any objections, constructive criticism, etc? 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 00:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I have made a couple of the suggested changes: moved the confirmation-hearings up to just under the main splashpage section with the nominee-pictures, and merged the agriculture-and-CEA-contenders in with the others. However, all the contender-sections are still in chronological ordering, I did not yet attempt the change to succession-ordering. The article is still under pending changes, so I may get reverted prior to these bold changes going live. 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 17:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
The external links in the "testimony" column in the Confirmation process timeline section should either be moved to a reference, or removed altogether per WP:EL. I will not remove them and had I done that, I'm sure someone would have thrown a hissy fit. I'm writing here so someone can remove them. Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 23:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Now that Trump & Pence have assumed office, perhaps the article & template should be updated. GoodDay ( talk) 03:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
we show Betsy DeVos as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs candidate. Seems unlikely. Carptrash ( talk) 05:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
How about using another background color for the "Proposed Cabinet" listing as the individuals are confirmed?
user:mnw2000 14:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
user:mnw2000 20:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Why is this even being considered for inclusion? An offhand pejorative by a media outlet does not seem noteworthy in my opinion. It was only added earlier today by an ip6 user ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Cabinet_of_Donald_Trump&diff=762037759&oldid=762025806), and now editors are calling it censorship to remove it. ValarianB ( talk) 16:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
The VP, Mike Pence was highlighted in green, whose legend is "Individual officially confirmed by a full Senate vote (if required)" StandNThrow ( talk) 23:26, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Two consecutive sentences in different paragraphs in the "Analysis" section read, "The media also noted the fact that several of Trump's cabinet nominees politically opposed the federal departments they were selected to lead.[34] The Washington Post noted that Trump's cabinet is the wealthiest in modern American history in terms of total personal wealth.[35]" Both cites are to single Washington Post articles.
Article currently numbered [34] does not support the first sentence. It would support something like "The media has noted the fact that four of Trump's cabinet nominees politically opposed programs ran by the federal departments they were selected to lead." The sentence should be rewritten, better sourced, or deleted.
Sentence [35] supports the second sentence but is inaccurate. I believe that it is correct that Trump's cabinet is the wealthiest in modern American history in terms of total personal wealth. However, the article cited has specifically been derided by pretty much every other media outlet as untrue and biased (primarily based upon the including the wealth of Betsy DeVos' father-in-law in calculating the net worth of Betsy Devos). Thus, a new article should be used to support the sentence or the sentence should be deleted. Wilkyisdashiznit ( talk) 18:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Are the Cabinet-level positions we have listed here technically cabinet members now? Trump has announced his 24-cabinet member team... Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 17:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The "Full Senate vote date" column in this table is currently sorting incorrectly--it appears that the presence of citations for Steve Mnuchin, David Shulkin, and Linda McMahon's vote dates are to blame. Are these citations important enough that the sorting should be revamped to accommodate them, or should they be excised in order to fix the table? Rocio Nadat 01:26, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
The article states that Mike Pence was the first vice-President to break a tie on a confirmation vote. However, almost all the sources I have read state the Harry Truman broke a tie to confirm Henry Wallace as Secretary of Commerce in 1945. The wikipedia article was changed by a certain " 2602:30A:C0C7:48E0:B50F:32EE:E0E7:7ECF" on this account to comply with the "historic" nature of what Pence did (second is not has historic as first, don'cha know). What's going on? Arglebargle79 ( talk) 12:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The Cabinet Secretaries are consistently listed throughout the article in order based on when they were created, which matches their order of precedence and the presidential line of succession. The cabinet-level positions, however, are given in at least two different orders in the article, neither of which matches the order that was given in the White House's official announcement of who would be included in the President's cabinet. The White House ordering would seem to me to be the preferable one, but regardless there should be one consistent order adopted throughout the article. Thoughts? 107.145.77.108 ( talk) 02:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Why does the VP have a grey background, defined as "Individual officially confirmed with no Senate consent needed". Since he was elected and not confirmed by any body, senate or otherwise, should the background be left as white?
user:mnw2000 14:09, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
According to NPR the Senate has already confirmed Perry as Energy Sec -> [13]
Since Priebus is here under White House Chief of Staff, should there be the inclusion of McMaster as National Security Advisor and maybe even Spicer as White House Press (to even things out) in the Cabinet-level officials section? Just curious. -- TDKR Chicago 101 ( talk) 06:05, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
As this article has changed in size and scope since its inception, many of the sections of this talk page are no longer relevant. I propose we archive the first 35-40 sections of this talk page. Following Wikipedia:ARCHIVE, I will seek consensus first. Also please let me know if you prefer it to be done manually, by ClueBot III, or by lowercase sigmabot III. If there are no responses within a week, I will probably move ahead with archiving some of this talk page. This is just to ensure old conversations don't clog up this talk page. Classicwiki ( talk) 19:14, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
The following is a list of relevant items that I think can be included in the article that I think will help improve the quality and content of this page for future reference.
The above list of topics are all issues that were directly addressed in each nominee's confirmation hearing(s) and therefore are in line with this page's goal of documenting "the confirmation process for any successful or unsuccessful cabinet nominees of Donald Trump's administration." I hope this list can serve as an effective task list for editors looking to improve this article. I tried gathering some starting sources in advance to make the process easier. Please comment if you have objections. I hope to put up an additional list depending if improvements are made. Classicwiki ( talk) 07:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
I have been told that (obviously) a Secretary with one foot out the door trumps the nominee for the position in terms of the table embedded in the article. However, in the case of an Acting Secretary versus a Nominee (Matthew Whitaker vs William Barr) who do we include? During the Trump Transition period and his early presidency, it was nominees over acting officials, but now it seems the opposite. Which should we go by? Moonhawk736283 ( talk) 01:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
It's currently as of mid-September 2020 out of alignment.
-- 100.4.146.152 ( talk) 13:43, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Am I going insane or has the Ambassador to the UN position been completely removed from the cabinet section? Is there a reason for this? { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:44, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
It was downgraded from a cabinet position to a none cabinet position Marius1603 ( talk) 14:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Last name is spelled Chao. The Raid on capitol hill can be linked to the existing page on the 2021 storming of capitol hill. Negrong502 ( talk) 19:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)