![]() | 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 40 | ← | Archive 43 | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | → | Archive 50 |
Since I see this error a lot in infoboxes, I think it's worth a bit of discussion. Consistency with incorrectness does not benefit the encyclopedia.
The Merriam-Webster entry for "occupation" is here. You will note that none of the senses refer to a title or specific position. The most applicable sense is 1b: "the principal business of one's life: vocation". The associated example is: "Teaching was her occupation", not "Geography teacher at Pleasantville Elementary School was her occupation".
If a businessman holds two business positions, we don't say that he has two occupations.
See Ben Bradlee for correct usage. Note that his occupation is shown as "newspaper editor", not "Editor of the Washington Post".
If anyone disagrees, I would very much like to hear their reasoning.
In Trump's infobox, I don't strongly object to showing specific positions after the occupation, in parentheses, as per status quo, although my preference would be to omit that. ― Mandruss ☎ 21:41, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Anyway it appears we have agreement on the definition of the word. I don't plan to add an entry to the consensuses list, as we don't need a consensus to observe the dictionary. Put differently, the dictionary entry represents a community consensus, that community being the English-speaking world. ― Mandruss ☎ 04:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can I edit OUTBREAK ( talk) 16:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The opening sentence of his wiki article states both politician and 45th President of the US. Why not simply: "...American businessman, television personality, and the 45th President of the United States." Tzhu07 ( talk) 23:56, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
See
#RfC: How to mention Donald's children in the infobox — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
JFG (
talk •
contribs)
05:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
|
---|
I just saw a very excellent example of children being mentioned on the "featured" Ronald Reagan article. In the infobox, only number of children is listed and an immediate see below redirecting to "Marriages and children". Most of the children are notable. Maybe we should do something similar here, after all it is an article about Donald Trump. Besides I don't think there is any need to mention their names in the infobox itself. This will solve the problem of non-notable children at the same time. I think it will be best to follow the style of a featured article. MonsterHunter32 ( talk) 08:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Note:This discussion has been pre-empted by an RfC immediately below. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC) |
See here. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 14:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Moved back down. It doesn't belong in an RfC. See WP:TPG.- Mr X 13:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
This edit summary is false: "No need for this and it's not a direct quote anyway; it is an editor's parsing of the article that seems intended to cast doubt on the content." Of course it's a direct quote. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 14:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
An existing footnote in the lead says this: Cillizza, Chris. "A fact checker looked into 158 things Donald Trump said. 78 percent were false", The Washington Post (July 1, 2016). I am suggesting to include a quote at the end of the footnote: "Now, there's some context that's necessary here....Trump has been fact-checked 38 more times than Clinton. And, yes, PolitiFact was the one deciding what statements to fact check. This is not a comprehensive guide to the relative truthfulness of every word uttered by Trump or Clinton in this campaign. But, the number of times his statements have been ruled 'false' or 'pants on fire' is still substantially higher than it is for her." Anythingyouwant ( talk) 14:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with clarifying the totality of what the writer in fact said. Especially in a rarely-read citation |quote=
. That would seem more consistent with NPOV; we are not required to stick to an anti-Trump narrative here. ―
Mandruss
☎
14:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed a trend recently to abuse the quote attribute of the citation template, and this would seem to me to be another example. It should only be used to provide relevant context, and this seems like an expansion of that. I agree with MrX on this matter. -- Scjessey ( talk) 16:12, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Trump was fact checked more often than Clinton because he made more statements than Clinton and lied more often.- To factcheck him more often on the premise that he lied more often would be highly circular, and I doubt anyone could do that and be taken halfway seriously. ― Mandruss ☎ 16:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Although the quote is accurate and the reference is reliable, I don't see any need to include this quote in the reference citation, and I certainly don't see any need to make a big battle over it. In general I think the use of quotes in reference citations is overdone. In fact it often seems to be done for argumentative purposes ("see? This is what I am trying to prove"); I would prefer to see reference quotes used only when necessary for clarity. That's a general comment; I am not implying anything about the particular case here. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed a sentence about this. His spokesman says it's false. See "Trump is not planning to restructure spy agencies, spokesman says" by Antonio José Vielma (Thu, 5 Jan '17), CNBC.com. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 13:58, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Howdy folks. TBH, I'm not overly concerned if we have one of either sizes - (elect) or (elect) - in the infobox. Just please, make sure that it matches what's in the Mike Pence article's infobox. GoodDay ( talk) 14:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
The following was deleted from the article today.
On January 13, 2017, John Lewis stated during an interview: "I don't see the president-elect as a legitimate president." [1] He added, "I think the Russians participated in having this man get elected, and they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. I don't plan to attend the Inauguration. I think there was a conspiracy on the part of the Russians, and others, that helped him get elected. That's not right. That's not fair. That's not the open, democratic process." [2] Trump replied on Twitter the following day, suggesting that Lewis should "spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to......mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results," and accusing Lewis of being "All talk, talk, talk — no action or results. Sad!" [3] Criticism of Trump for his Twitter comments noted Lewis is the civil rights leader who was brutally beaten for the cause. [4] [5]
References
{{
citation}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work=
(
help)
I believe something like this would be included in a NPOV Donald Trump article as it has been much more widely reported in the media than most items currently included in the Donald Trump article. Does anyone else care to comment? Gouncbeatduke ( talk) 14:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Way, way TMI for this biographical article. There are articles where this information could be included (John Lewis, for sure, and maybe inauguration) but not this one. -- MelanieN ( talk) 19:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I am asking for the addition of the Presidential seal into President Donald Trump's ranking, as seen in past president's Wikipedia page.
I have written out the following text for a transfer onto the page and to remove the pre-existing labels. Fernandillo1 ( talk) 04:33, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Political positions section the following subsection should be added:
==Same-sex marriages== Answering the question about Same-sex marriages, Trump said: "It’s the law of the land -- and that he is “fine” with that being the case". [4] [5]
Thanks !! M.Karelin ( talk) 14:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
a B.S. in economics Babuon ( talk) 18:43, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Should be included. Samswik ( talk) 02:10, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
If multiple politicians were saying it, it would be worth mentioning. With just one person saying it - and not making a big point of it, but mentioning it in an interview - it should be covered only at Lewis's page IMO. Some of the other things that Samswik mentioned should be in the inauguration article. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
It belongs in John Lewis' article and the Inauguration article, but not here (not unless it grows bigger or something). As an aside when are we gonna get that Stuff Trump says on Twitter article? Volunteer Marek ( talk) 02:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Worth to mention? http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/donald-trump-gibt-pressekonferenz-ihr-seid-fake-news-a-1129595.html Élisée P. Bruneau ( talk) 22:15, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
RS regarding Trump claims during the transition: [6] (perhaps the landslide one for this article) see also, [7] for analysis. -- Alanscottwalker ( talk) 15:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I think someone needs to change it to http://www.whitehouse.gov. He is listed as President and has been inaugurated.-- Guiletheme ( talk) 17:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there consensus for this change?
Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is an American businessman, television personality, politician, and the 45th President of the United States. Trump won the general election on November 8, 2016, against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton. At age 70, he is the oldest and wealthiest person to assume the presidency, the first without prior military or governmental service, and the fifth elected with less than a plurality of the national popular vote.
-- Ilovetopaint ( talk) 17:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Funny that Mandruss mentions WP:OSE. This policy says in the second sentence, "The encyclopedia should be consistent in the content it provides" which seems to be exactly catherinejarvis's point. If we can give a unique lead to President Trumps' article, people could argue that putting "adulterer" in Bill Clinton's first sentence is just as valid, since it is an undisputed fact and reflected in the main portion of his article. But of course none of us would agree to that. Putting "television personality" before President does, in fact, seem like a disguised dig at the President, as if it were more important. She has a point there. Princetoniac ( talk) 18:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I am going to undo [ ], and add Trump tower back into his residences as a private residence, as there are several sources to state that he will use Trump Tower now that he's in office, and use this as a way to gain consensus. While assuming good faith, I believe the editor is imposing what he views to be correct without gaining consensus. I believe leaving Trump Tower up as his "official" residence, and putting Trump Tower as his "private" residence is accurate, because he has stated, and it has been reported by several sources, that he intends to return to Trump Tower regularly during his presidency. Fbifriday ( talk) 23:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Official portrait has now been made available on WhiteHouse.gov, see photo at right. Calibrador ( talk) 17:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I suggest a bit more work yet into redoing or editing the wikifile for original version giving more care to metainfo about sourcing as that was one of the issues under prior discussion. This one starts as an actual photo and from Trump site, but the mediawiki entry is a bit messed/missing. The posted image is here, second image on White House subpage for People People President Donald J. Trump via either The Administration or The Presidents subpages. I see no named author and there seems no permissions, licensing, or ownership data provided by the site. (The main page copyright footer is not available, and USA.gov is directing me to President Trump which is Page not found.) Cheers Markbassett ( talk) 19:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Please remove "Incumbent" from underneath Trump's picture. He is not an incumbent (being RE-elected), but rather he's new to the office. Thanks. Grattan33 ( talk) 20:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC) grattan33
Document statistics for this Donald Trump BLP:
Document statistics for the Hillary Clinton BLP (which is a featured article):
Accordingly, I don't think the TooLong tag is justified at the top of this BLP at this time, and will remove it (it's already been removed and restored without any talk page discussion). Anythingyouwant ( talk) 23:31, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Trump on whether that page should redirect here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olidog ( talk • contribs) 12:00, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't think we should have multiple websites and Twitter accounts in the infobox. It should be sufficient to list the Whitehouse website and the POTUS Twitter account. In fact, the recent RfC was clear that one additional social media accounts should be added. JFG has added these twice today, the second time over my objection.- Mr X 00:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The infobox lists Trump's children as: "5, including: Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump, Tiffany Trump". This immediately raises the question "Which one's missing?". Template:Infobox person/doc says that children's names should be included "Only if independently notable themselves or particularly relevant" and that "For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of children of living persons, unless notable", so the guidelines seem to indicate that young Barron Trump, who doesn't have his own article, shouldn't be included. But I think this a case where WP:IAR comes into play. The omission of Barron is distracting, so the inclusion of his name improves the article. He is high profile and hardly an unknown figure, so I don't think the privacy reasoning applies. And whilst he doesn't have his own article, Barron does have his own subsection, so arguably the clause about notability doesn't apply either. I propose that the "5, including:" is removed from the infobox and "Barron Trump" is added. What do you think? Bazonka ( talk) 00:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
"Children: five including #1 #2 #3 #4"it makes far more sense to say
"Children: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5"47.222.203.135 ( talk) 00:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
For what it is worth their is a draft for his own article at Draft:Barron Trump. If he becomes worthy of his own article this can be published into the mainspace. Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 16:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Should this article be added to Category:New York Democrats, Category:New York Independents, and Category:Reform Party of the United States of America politicians? He was formerly affiliated with all the described parties. MB298 ( talk) 04:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Isn't it disallowed per Wikipedia rules to not mention names of non-notable children in infobox per Wikipedia rules? If yes, then why is Barron's name included? MonsterHunter32 ( talk) 07:43, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
And yet, if you go against consensus here, you will be in violation of the discretionary sanctions at WP:ARBAPDS which can result in you being blocked from editing. Twitbookspacetube ( talk) 08:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Should Template:Trump transition be moved to another preferred name? The "transition" is now outdated and another user as already changed the template to not be referred to as "Template:Trump transition"... Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 02:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
This [ ] removed the words "as yet" from the sentence about russia supposedly having damaging information on Trump. Same editor removed it last night, I reverted, he removed again. The comment he added was ridiculous as well, because the sheer definition of the phrase "as yet" is "up to the present time", which is entirely accurate description of the accusations. They have not been substantiated yet, they may or may not be, but either way, "As yet" is still the accurate way to describe the accusations. Coming here to gather consensus. "As yet" or not? Fbifriday ( talk) 15:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Do you mean we should use this example to remove "unproven" from the sentence being discussed here?Yes, sorry if that was unclear. ― Mandruss ☎ 19:29, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The info box photograph of Donald Trump leaves much to be desired. He has a gloomy, doomsday look on his face. This photo should be replaced with a new photo of a happy, smiling, President. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:36, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I support Mandruss' suggestion of a 6-month moratorium (I wouldn't mind making it for the duration of his presidency) on any discussion of the infobox image. It can change only if the White House comes out with a different portrait and then we should use it. We always use the official portrait, and in this case we have affirmed that through agonizingly long discussion. BTW I think the consensus refers to the actual official portrait, not a cropped or otherwise modified version. -- MelanieN ( talk) 17:16, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Which image is best for our purposes? Anythingyouwant ( talk) 17:54, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Once an official portrait becomes available, there's a fairly clear mandate that among the discussants and through precedent that we use that image.It didn't say "once Trump is sworn in" or "once the White House web site is updated" or "once there is an official portrait that a majority of Wikipedia editors do not dislike". This is an official portrait and it must go into the article with no further discussion or moving the goalposts. The licensing and colorizing issues are being debated at Commons with a clear trend to keep the picture and accept the PD-US license. Even if that image ends up deleted (which is doubtful), we can revert to another one at that time. Now let's quit the edit warring, insert the picture that we have, and just move on. — JFG talk 15:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
∼∼∼∼
Eric0928
Talk
03:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)File:Donald Trump President-elect portrait (cropped).jpg This photo was released by the inaugural committee as the official photo of the president which will appear in airports and government offices. I suggest that we use it in the infoBox, as it's the official photo [redacted]. As prior consensus is required, I now officially request it. Arglebargle79 ( talk) 15:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Once an official portrait becomes available, there's a fairly clear mandate that among the discussants and through precedent that we use that image.It didn't say "once Trump is sworn in" or "once the White House web site is updated" or "once there is an official portrait that a majority of Wikipedia editors do not dislike". This is an official portrait and it must go into the article with no further discussion or moving the goalposts. The licensing and colorizing issues are being debated at Commons with a clear trend to keep the picture and accept the PD-US license. Even if that image ends up deleted (which is doubtful), we can revert to another one at that time. Now let's quit the edit warring, insert the picture that we have, and just move on. — JFG talk 15:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
According to the Washington Metro's Twitter feed, trips taken up until 11 A.M. ET are significantly down for this inauguration over 2013 and 2009. Even down on 2005. ( source)
Presumably, this reinforces the fact that Trump is the most unpopular incoming president in 4 decades. Obviously the article needs something about this historic unpopularity. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Put it in Inauguration article, not in the main article. Fbifriday ( talk) 17:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Vox has done some stunning comparison photos showing how poorly attended today's event has been. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
So liberals block the access to inauguration and then talk about the low attendance? First of all, the picture presented in Vox (far-left dubious "source") is wrong with wrong time, second, the official attendance numbers are not yet in, with indications that this was the most attended inauguration in history. The source is White House press conference that happened minutes ago. Go check it. -- Novis-M ( talk) 22:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The vox picture was taken at 11:04, the Obama picture was taken at 11:30. CNN has released a gigapixel photograph of the inauguration during the President's speech, the crowd is very full. I think this point is moot until we get official numbers, which we won't get, because the Park Police don't release numbers, so let's just move on. Fbifriday ( talk) 23:04, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Virtually all US media outlets (and many foreign media outlets) has shown like-for-like pictures of the 2017 and 2009 inaugurations that prove Trump's crowd was significantly smaller than Obama's. When White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer read his statement yesterday, the pictures he himself put up showed the Obama crowd was much larger. After the presser, most US media outlets called out Spicer for what turned out to be a string of falsehoods, including about the crowd numbers. It's all anyone is talking about today. So no, this is not "fake news" that is going away. -- Scjessey ( talk) 15:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I agree with those who say that this information belongs in the Inauguration article and possibly in the Presidency and Transition articles - but not in this biography. I don't suppose either article can use this item (coverage too little and too brief): when Trump took over the presidential Twitter account, the featured images on it were his official portrait and a photograph of a huge flag-waving crowd at an inauguration. Oops: the photo was of Obama's inauguration. It was quickly replaced. [13] -- MelanieN ( talk) 20:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
He is no longer incumbent. He is actually President. 98.110.153.124 ( talk) 22:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
"is an American businessman, television personality, politician, who currently serves as the 45th President of the United States" - Should read "television personality, and politician who currently serves as the 45th..." Bigeyedbeansfromvenus ( talk) 06:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is an American businessman, television personality, and politician who currently serves as the 45th President of the United States.
Although personally, I still don't see why it is necessary for "politician" to be there at all, considering Presidents are politicians, by definition. Greggydude ( talk) 16:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I've removed a paragraph from the article that appears to conflate the Federal Budget Deficit (the disparity between federal income and spending) with the National Debt (the total amount owed by the federal government). This is not the fault of the editor who added it (although the use of "abysmal" was obviously... er... abysmal), but rather it was the fault of the poorly-written article in The Hill that was used as a source. The article confuses debt with deficit and was basically just parroting talking points and making wild claims about how effective the policy would be, without giving any real indication of how it would be achieved or getting the opinion of any economic experts or Democrats. -- Scjessey ( talk) 14:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
|
Hey everyone. There's a discussion at Talk:Trump#Requested move 21 January 2017 as to whether Trump should redirect to this article or not. Thoughts from this article's contributors are appreciated Nohomersryan ( talk) 18:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Current sentence reads: "An order of January 27 suspended admission of refugees for 120 days and denied entry for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days, citing security concerns about terrorism."
I believe the of should be an on. I'm very new to editing pages, still getting the hang of this thing. Keep up the good work! - Sunden17 ( talk) 22:02, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the |education=
parameter to |alma_mater=
. It just listed the school that he studied, not the degree.
203.145.94.110 (
talk)
07:27, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The first sentence in Wikipedia biographies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama begin with the same phrasing, as the biography of Donald Trump should do. I am going to change it to reflect the other biographies of his predecessors. Catherinejarvis ( talk) 17:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The article on President Trump should reflect articles on other recent Presidents, to avoid people using it as a platform for snarky comments. Saying he is a television personality before saying he is the President invites people to abuse other pages for other Presidents. Any President is a television personality by definition. The article should say "Donald Trump is an American politician and the 45th President of the United States" and stop there, to be in line with articles on Clinton, Bush and Obama which say exactly the same thing in their opening sentence. Catherinejarvis ( talk) 18:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Support The article should be consistent with similar articles, per WP:OSE Princetoniac ( talk) 18:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The first sentence needs to be simplified to the primacy of his current office. I propsed this. Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is the 45th President of the United States. He is known for being an American businessman, television personality and politician.
How there is a claim of consensus when the previous discussion said no consensus was reached and the fact he's only been in the role for 4 days. For reference his predecessor, Obama, doesn't mention lawyer, law professor, community organizer, Nobel Prize winner or Senator in the first few paragraphs. "President of the united States" is a rather penultimate office and distinction. It is also his current role. Trump is known for other things but the office he holds should be set out as what he is. First sentence should not give equal weight to anything else. I didn't remove that information, just moved it to a position that is subordinate. --
DHeyward (
talk)
02:11, 25 January 2017 (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 40 | ← | Archive 43 | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | → | Archive 50 |
Since I see this error a lot in infoboxes, I think it's worth a bit of discussion. Consistency with incorrectness does not benefit the encyclopedia.
The Merriam-Webster entry for "occupation" is here. You will note that none of the senses refer to a title or specific position. The most applicable sense is 1b: "the principal business of one's life: vocation". The associated example is: "Teaching was her occupation", not "Geography teacher at Pleasantville Elementary School was her occupation".
If a businessman holds two business positions, we don't say that he has two occupations.
See Ben Bradlee for correct usage. Note that his occupation is shown as "newspaper editor", not "Editor of the Washington Post".
If anyone disagrees, I would very much like to hear their reasoning.
In Trump's infobox, I don't strongly object to showing specific positions after the occupation, in parentheses, as per status quo, although my preference would be to omit that. ― Mandruss ☎ 21:41, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Anyway it appears we have agreement on the definition of the word. I don't plan to add an entry to the consensuses list, as we don't need a consensus to observe the dictionary. Put differently, the dictionary entry represents a community consensus, that community being the English-speaking world. ― Mandruss ☎ 04:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can I edit OUTBREAK ( talk) 16:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The opening sentence of his wiki article states both politician and 45th President of the US. Why not simply: "...American businessman, television personality, and the 45th President of the United States." Tzhu07 ( talk) 23:56, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
See
#RfC: How to mention Donald's children in the infobox — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
JFG (
talk •
contribs)
05:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
|
---|
I just saw a very excellent example of children being mentioned on the "featured" Ronald Reagan article. In the infobox, only number of children is listed and an immediate see below redirecting to "Marriages and children". Most of the children are notable. Maybe we should do something similar here, after all it is an article about Donald Trump. Besides I don't think there is any need to mention their names in the infobox itself. This will solve the problem of non-notable children at the same time. I think it will be best to follow the style of a featured article. MonsterHunter32 ( talk) 08:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Note:This discussion has been pre-empted by an RfC immediately below. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC) |
See here. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 14:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Moved back down. It doesn't belong in an RfC. See WP:TPG.- Mr X 13:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
This edit summary is false: "No need for this and it's not a direct quote anyway; it is an editor's parsing of the article that seems intended to cast doubt on the content." Of course it's a direct quote. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 14:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
An existing footnote in the lead says this: Cillizza, Chris. "A fact checker looked into 158 things Donald Trump said. 78 percent were false", The Washington Post (July 1, 2016). I am suggesting to include a quote at the end of the footnote: "Now, there's some context that's necessary here....Trump has been fact-checked 38 more times than Clinton. And, yes, PolitiFact was the one deciding what statements to fact check. This is not a comprehensive guide to the relative truthfulness of every word uttered by Trump or Clinton in this campaign. But, the number of times his statements have been ruled 'false' or 'pants on fire' is still substantially higher than it is for her." Anythingyouwant ( talk) 14:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with clarifying the totality of what the writer in fact said. Especially in a rarely-read citation |quote=
. That would seem more consistent with NPOV; we are not required to stick to an anti-Trump narrative here. ―
Mandruss
☎
14:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed a trend recently to abuse the quote attribute of the citation template, and this would seem to me to be another example. It should only be used to provide relevant context, and this seems like an expansion of that. I agree with MrX on this matter. -- Scjessey ( talk) 16:12, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Trump was fact checked more often than Clinton because he made more statements than Clinton and lied more often.- To factcheck him more often on the premise that he lied more often would be highly circular, and I doubt anyone could do that and be taken halfway seriously. ― Mandruss ☎ 16:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Although the quote is accurate and the reference is reliable, I don't see any need to include this quote in the reference citation, and I certainly don't see any need to make a big battle over it. In general I think the use of quotes in reference citations is overdone. In fact it often seems to be done for argumentative purposes ("see? This is what I am trying to prove"); I would prefer to see reference quotes used only when necessary for clarity. That's a general comment; I am not implying anything about the particular case here. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed a sentence about this. His spokesman says it's false. See "Trump is not planning to restructure spy agencies, spokesman says" by Antonio José Vielma (Thu, 5 Jan '17), CNBC.com. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 13:58, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Howdy folks. TBH, I'm not overly concerned if we have one of either sizes - (elect) or (elect) - in the infobox. Just please, make sure that it matches what's in the Mike Pence article's infobox. GoodDay ( talk) 14:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
The following was deleted from the article today.
On January 13, 2017, John Lewis stated during an interview: "I don't see the president-elect as a legitimate president." [1] He added, "I think the Russians participated in having this man get elected, and they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. I don't plan to attend the Inauguration. I think there was a conspiracy on the part of the Russians, and others, that helped him get elected. That's not right. That's not fair. That's not the open, democratic process." [2] Trump replied on Twitter the following day, suggesting that Lewis should "spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to......mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results," and accusing Lewis of being "All talk, talk, talk — no action or results. Sad!" [3] Criticism of Trump for his Twitter comments noted Lewis is the civil rights leader who was brutally beaten for the cause. [4] [5]
References
{{
citation}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work=
(
help)
I believe something like this would be included in a NPOV Donald Trump article as it has been much more widely reported in the media than most items currently included in the Donald Trump article. Does anyone else care to comment? Gouncbeatduke ( talk) 14:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Way, way TMI for this biographical article. There are articles where this information could be included (John Lewis, for sure, and maybe inauguration) but not this one. -- MelanieN ( talk) 19:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I am asking for the addition of the Presidential seal into President Donald Trump's ranking, as seen in past president's Wikipedia page.
I have written out the following text for a transfer onto the page and to remove the pre-existing labels. Fernandillo1 ( talk) 04:33, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Political positions section the following subsection should be added:
==Same-sex marriages== Answering the question about Same-sex marriages, Trump said: "It’s the law of the land -- and that he is “fine” with that being the case". [4] [5]
Thanks !! M.Karelin ( talk) 14:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
a B.S. in economics Babuon ( talk) 18:43, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Should be included. Samswik ( talk) 02:10, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
If multiple politicians were saying it, it would be worth mentioning. With just one person saying it - and not making a big point of it, but mentioning it in an interview - it should be covered only at Lewis's page IMO. Some of the other things that Samswik mentioned should be in the inauguration article. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
It belongs in John Lewis' article and the Inauguration article, but not here (not unless it grows bigger or something). As an aside when are we gonna get that Stuff Trump says on Twitter article? Volunteer Marek ( talk) 02:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Worth to mention? http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/donald-trump-gibt-pressekonferenz-ihr-seid-fake-news-a-1129595.html Élisée P. Bruneau ( talk) 22:15, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
RS regarding Trump claims during the transition: [6] (perhaps the landslide one for this article) see also, [7] for analysis. -- Alanscottwalker ( talk) 15:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I think someone needs to change it to http://www.whitehouse.gov. He is listed as President and has been inaugurated.-- Guiletheme ( talk) 17:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there consensus for this change?
Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is an American businessman, television personality, politician, and the 45th President of the United States. Trump won the general election on November 8, 2016, against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton. At age 70, he is the oldest and wealthiest person to assume the presidency, the first without prior military or governmental service, and the fifth elected with less than a plurality of the national popular vote.
-- Ilovetopaint ( talk) 17:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Funny that Mandruss mentions WP:OSE. This policy says in the second sentence, "The encyclopedia should be consistent in the content it provides" which seems to be exactly catherinejarvis's point. If we can give a unique lead to President Trumps' article, people could argue that putting "adulterer" in Bill Clinton's first sentence is just as valid, since it is an undisputed fact and reflected in the main portion of his article. But of course none of us would agree to that. Putting "television personality" before President does, in fact, seem like a disguised dig at the President, as if it were more important. She has a point there. Princetoniac ( talk) 18:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I am going to undo [ ], and add Trump tower back into his residences as a private residence, as there are several sources to state that he will use Trump Tower now that he's in office, and use this as a way to gain consensus. While assuming good faith, I believe the editor is imposing what he views to be correct without gaining consensus. I believe leaving Trump Tower up as his "official" residence, and putting Trump Tower as his "private" residence is accurate, because he has stated, and it has been reported by several sources, that he intends to return to Trump Tower regularly during his presidency. Fbifriday ( talk) 23:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Official portrait has now been made available on WhiteHouse.gov, see photo at right. Calibrador ( talk) 17:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I suggest a bit more work yet into redoing or editing the wikifile for original version giving more care to metainfo about sourcing as that was one of the issues under prior discussion. This one starts as an actual photo and from Trump site, but the mediawiki entry is a bit messed/missing. The posted image is here, second image on White House subpage for People People President Donald J. Trump via either The Administration or The Presidents subpages. I see no named author and there seems no permissions, licensing, or ownership data provided by the site. (The main page copyright footer is not available, and USA.gov is directing me to President Trump which is Page not found.) Cheers Markbassett ( talk) 19:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Please remove "Incumbent" from underneath Trump's picture. He is not an incumbent (being RE-elected), but rather he's new to the office. Thanks. Grattan33 ( talk) 20:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC) grattan33
Document statistics for this Donald Trump BLP:
Document statistics for the Hillary Clinton BLP (which is a featured article):
Accordingly, I don't think the TooLong tag is justified at the top of this BLP at this time, and will remove it (it's already been removed and restored without any talk page discussion). Anythingyouwant ( talk) 23:31, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Trump on whether that page should redirect here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olidog ( talk • contribs) 12:00, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't think we should have multiple websites and Twitter accounts in the infobox. It should be sufficient to list the Whitehouse website and the POTUS Twitter account. In fact, the recent RfC was clear that one additional social media accounts should be added. JFG has added these twice today, the second time over my objection.- Mr X 00:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The infobox lists Trump's children as: "5, including: Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump, Tiffany Trump". This immediately raises the question "Which one's missing?". Template:Infobox person/doc says that children's names should be included "Only if independently notable themselves or particularly relevant" and that "For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of children of living persons, unless notable", so the guidelines seem to indicate that young Barron Trump, who doesn't have his own article, shouldn't be included. But I think this a case where WP:IAR comes into play. The omission of Barron is distracting, so the inclusion of his name improves the article. He is high profile and hardly an unknown figure, so I don't think the privacy reasoning applies. And whilst he doesn't have his own article, Barron does have his own subsection, so arguably the clause about notability doesn't apply either. I propose that the "5, including:" is removed from the infobox and "Barron Trump" is added. What do you think? Bazonka ( talk) 00:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
"Children: five including #1 #2 #3 #4"it makes far more sense to say
"Children: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5"47.222.203.135 ( talk) 00:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
For what it is worth their is a draft for his own article at Draft:Barron Trump. If he becomes worthy of his own article this can be published into the mainspace. Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 16:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Should this article be added to Category:New York Democrats, Category:New York Independents, and Category:Reform Party of the United States of America politicians? He was formerly affiliated with all the described parties. MB298 ( talk) 04:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Isn't it disallowed per Wikipedia rules to not mention names of non-notable children in infobox per Wikipedia rules? If yes, then why is Barron's name included? MonsterHunter32 ( talk) 07:43, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
And yet, if you go against consensus here, you will be in violation of the discretionary sanctions at WP:ARBAPDS which can result in you being blocked from editing. Twitbookspacetube ( talk) 08:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Should Template:Trump transition be moved to another preferred name? The "transition" is now outdated and another user as already changed the template to not be referred to as "Template:Trump transition"... Corkythe hornetfan (ping me) 02:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
This [ ] removed the words "as yet" from the sentence about russia supposedly having damaging information on Trump. Same editor removed it last night, I reverted, he removed again. The comment he added was ridiculous as well, because the sheer definition of the phrase "as yet" is "up to the present time", which is entirely accurate description of the accusations. They have not been substantiated yet, they may or may not be, but either way, "As yet" is still the accurate way to describe the accusations. Coming here to gather consensus. "As yet" or not? Fbifriday ( talk) 15:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Do you mean we should use this example to remove "unproven" from the sentence being discussed here?Yes, sorry if that was unclear. ― Mandruss ☎ 19:29, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The info box photograph of Donald Trump leaves much to be desired. He has a gloomy, doomsday look on his face. This photo should be replaced with a new photo of a happy, smiling, President. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:36, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I support Mandruss' suggestion of a 6-month moratorium (I wouldn't mind making it for the duration of his presidency) on any discussion of the infobox image. It can change only if the White House comes out with a different portrait and then we should use it. We always use the official portrait, and in this case we have affirmed that through agonizingly long discussion. BTW I think the consensus refers to the actual official portrait, not a cropped or otherwise modified version. -- MelanieN ( talk) 17:16, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Which image is best for our purposes? Anythingyouwant ( talk) 17:54, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Once an official portrait becomes available, there's a fairly clear mandate that among the discussants and through precedent that we use that image.It didn't say "once Trump is sworn in" or "once the White House web site is updated" or "once there is an official portrait that a majority of Wikipedia editors do not dislike". This is an official portrait and it must go into the article with no further discussion or moving the goalposts. The licensing and colorizing issues are being debated at Commons with a clear trend to keep the picture and accept the PD-US license. Even if that image ends up deleted (which is doubtful), we can revert to another one at that time. Now let's quit the edit warring, insert the picture that we have, and just move on. — JFG talk 15:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
∼∼∼∼
Eric0928
Talk
03:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)File:Donald Trump President-elect portrait (cropped).jpg This photo was released by the inaugural committee as the official photo of the president which will appear in airports and government offices. I suggest that we use it in the infoBox, as it's the official photo [redacted]. As prior consensus is required, I now officially request it. Arglebargle79 ( talk) 15:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Once an official portrait becomes available, there's a fairly clear mandate that among the discussants and through precedent that we use that image.It didn't say "once Trump is sworn in" or "once the White House web site is updated" or "once there is an official portrait that a majority of Wikipedia editors do not dislike". This is an official portrait and it must go into the article with no further discussion or moving the goalposts. The licensing and colorizing issues are being debated at Commons with a clear trend to keep the picture and accept the PD-US license. Even if that image ends up deleted (which is doubtful), we can revert to another one at that time. Now let's quit the edit warring, insert the picture that we have, and just move on. — JFG talk 15:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
According to the Washington Metro's Twitter feed, trips taken up until 11 A.M. ET are significantly down for this inauguration over 2013 and 2009. Even down on 2005. ( source)
Presumably, this reinforces the fact that Trump is the most unpopular incoming president in 4 decades. Obviously the article needs something about this historic unpopularity. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Put it in Inauguration article, not in the main article. Fbifriday ( talk) 17:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Vox has done some stunning comparison photos showing how poorly attended today's event has been. -- Scjessey ( talk) 17:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
So liberals block the access to inauguration and then talk about the low attendance? First of all, the picture presented in Vox (far-left dubious "source") is wrong with wrong time, second, the official attendance numbers are not yet in, with indications that this was the most attended inauguration in history. The source is White House press conference that happened minutes ago. Go check it. -- Novis-M ( talk) 22:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
The vox picture was taken at 11:04, the Obama picture was taken at 11:30. CNN has released a gigapixel photograph of the inauguration during the President's speech, the crowd is very full. I think this point is moot until we get official numbers, which we won't get, because the Park Police don't release numbers, so let's just move on. Fbifriday ( talk) 23:04, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Virtually all US media outlets (and many foreign media outlets) has shown like-for-like pictures of the 2017 and 2009 inaugurations that prove Trump's crowd was significantly smaller than Obama's. When White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer read his statement yesterday, the pictures he himself put up showed the Obama crowd was much larger. After the presser, most US media outlets called out Spicer for what turned out to be a string of falsehoods, including about the crowd numbers. It's all anyone is talking about today. So no, this is not "fake news" that is going away. -- Scjessey ( talk) 15:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I agree with those who say that this information belongs in the Inauguration article and possibly in the Presidency and Transition articles - but not in this biography. I don't suppose either article can use this item (coverage too little and too brief): when Trump took over the presidential Twitter account, the featured images on it were his official portrait and a photograph of a huge flag-waving crowd at an inauguration. Oops: the photo was of Obama's inauguration. It was quickly replaced. [13] -- MelanieN ( talk) 20:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
He is no longer incumbent. He is actually President. 98.110.153.124 ( talk) 22:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
"is an American businessman, television personality, politician, who currently serves as the 45th President of the United States" - Should read "television personality, and politician who currently serves as the 45th..." Bigeyedbeansfromvenus ( talk) 06:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is an American businessman, television personality, and politician who currently serves as the 45th President of the United States.
Although personally, I still don't see why it is necessary for "politician" to be there at all, considering Presidents are politicians, by definition. Greggydude ( talk) 16:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I've removed a paragraph from the article that appears to conflate the Federal Budget Deficit (the disparity between federal income and spending) with the National Debt (the total amount owed by the federal government). This is not the fault of the editor who added it (although the use of "abysmal" was obviously... er... abysmal), but rather it was the fault of the poorly-written article in The Hill that was used as a source. The article confuses debt with deficit and was basically just parroting talking points and making wild claims about how effective the policy would be, without giving any real indication of how it would be achieved or getting the opinion of any economic experts or Democrats. -- Scjessey ( talk) 14:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
|
Hey everyone. There's a discussion at Talk:Trump#Requested move 21 January 2017 as to whether Trump should redirect to this article or not. Thoughts from this article's contributors are appreciated Nohomersryan ( talk) 18:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Current sentence reads: "An order of January 27 suspended admission of refugees for 120 days and denied entry for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days, citing security concerns about terrorism."
I believe the of should be an on. I'm very new to editing pages, still getting the hang of this thing. Keep up the good work! - Sunden17 ( talk) 22:02, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the |education=
parameter to |alma_mater=
. It just listed the school that he studied, not the degree.
203.145.94.110 (
talk)
07:27, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The first sentence in Wikipedia biographies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama begin with the same phrasing, as the biography of Donald Trump should do. I am going to change it to reflect the other biographies of his predecessors. Catherinejarvis ( talk) 17:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The article on President Trump should reflect articles on other recent Presidents, to avoid people using it as a platform for snarky comments. Saying he is a television personality before saying he is the President invites people to abuse other pages for other Presidents. Any President is a television personality by definition. The article should say "Donald Trump is an American politician and the 45th President of the United States" and stop there, to be in line with articles on Clinton, Bush and Obama which say exactly the same thing in their opening sentence. Catherinejarvis ( talk) 18:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Support The article should be consistent with similar articles, per WP:OSE Princetoniac ( talk) 18:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The first sentence needs to be simplified to the primacy of his current office. I propsed this. Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is the 45th President of the United States. He is known for being an American businessman, television personality and politician.
How there is a claim of consensus when the previous discussion said no consensus was reached and the fact he's only been in the role for 4 days. For reference his predecessor, Obama, doesn't mention lawyer, law professor, community organizer, Nobel Prize winner or Senator in the first few paragraphs. "President of the united States" is a rather penultimate office and distinction. It is also his current role. Trump is known for other things but the office he holds should be set out as what he is. First sentence should not give equal weight to anything else. I didn't remove that information, just moved it to a position that is subordinate. --
DHeyward (
talk)
02:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)