This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Elizabeth Warren article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about editors' personal viewpoints or political talking points. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about editors' personal viewpoints or political talking points at the Reference desk. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Elizabeth Warren has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on June 22, 2017, and June 22, 2022. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
/info/en/?search=Elizabeth_Warren#Ancestry_and_Native_American_relations
'Throughout his presidency, former president Donald Trump mocked Warren for her assertions of Native American ancestry, and called her the slur "Pocahontas".'
I struggle to see how it can be justified to refer to that as a "slur". Maybe some left leaning publications do, but does a majority of publications? From what I've seen the answer is no.
'At a July 2018 Montana rally, he promised that if he debated Warren, he would pay $1 million to her favorite charity if she could prove her Native American ancestry via a DNA test. Warren released results of a DNA test in October 2018, then asked Trump to donate the money to the National Indigenous Women's Resource Center. Trump responded by denying that he had made the challenge. The DNA test found that Warren's ancestry is mostly European but "strongly support[ed] the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor", likely "in the range of 6 to 10 generations ago".'
Very misleading, Trump challenged her to take a DNA test that "shows you’re an Indian". Clearly having the same amount of Native DNA as any random white American doesn't satisfy that. Also the 'Trump responded by denying that he made the challenge' is also misleading as fact checked here - https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/oct/15/context-donald-trumps-1-million-offer-elizabeth-wa/
'The DNA test found that Warren's ancestry is mostly European but "strongly support[ed] the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor", likely "in the range of 6 to 10 generations ago".'
This is potentially misleading to viewers unless we note that this is the same amount of ancestry that a random white American is likely to have. 84.70.169.190 ( talk) 07:56, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Can we get a correction on the $1m bet? Trump challenged her to take a DNA test that "shows you’re an Indian", not "prove her Native American ancestry" as the article currently says. And he never denied that he made that challenge - https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/oct/15/context-donald-trumps-1-million-offer-elizabeth-wa/ 84.70.169.190 ( talk) 14:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
The subsection "Ancestry and Native American relations" in the larger public image section seems a little weird to me. You have 5 paragraphs on her ancestry controversy, and then the section ends with two sentences about Deb Haaland's praise and endorsement of her. I have no objection to the information itself, but it just seems weird to have it in a section that is overwhelmingly focused on the issue of her ancestry. Why not move the Haaland endorsement sentence to somewhere in the section on her presidential campaign instead? 2600:8800:4CE0:E400:7D60:3525:5CF3:500D ( talk) 05:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Warren started her second term in 2019, not 2017. 2600:4040:5C67:9000:D474:A782:52F1:9780 ( talk) 00:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Pete unseth has recently reverted me to re-add the
Category:Academics who falsely claimed minority ancestry to this page. Respecting
WP:BRD, but also keeping in mind the
WP:BLP imperative that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion
, I will restate my rationale here before re-reverting.
WP:BLPCAT states: Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources
. The name of the category is "Academics who falsely claimed minority ancestry". The problem with this is that I haven't seen a reliable source which states that she "falsely claimed minority ancestry." Sure, I've seen reliable sources affirming that she is not a member of a tribe, and that she should not be considered 'racially' Native American. But I haven't seen any source debunking the idea that she had a Native American ancestor, which is what the category name is saying. Because of this, I feel that it's not appropriate for this category to remain on the page of a living person.
MediaKill13 (
talk) 10:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
false. To my understanding, if a claim cannot be proven one way or another, it is not true or false, but unproven, or indeterminate. The question I'm asking myself is, would it be acceptable to have a sentence in the article saying 'Elizabeth Warren's claims to Native American ancestry have been proven false?'. Even in the section discussing her claims, nowhere in Wikipedia's voice is it stated that her claims were false, which is what the category name does. MediaKill13 ( talk) 08:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
This recent edit has a misstatement of the source
[12] First of all it takes the "South American" thing out of context. The full quote is Bustamante has said that due to limited Native America databases, he compared Warren’s DNA sample to recent samples from indigenous populations in South America rather than Native Americans in the U.S.
, which does not say they weren't Native American. They were Native South American. Secondly the overall conclusion from the piece you gave was 'Not a yes or no answer' None of the experts and industry executives who spoke to ABC News -- including scientists who have worked with Bustamante -- directly refuted his conclusions. Instead, they contended that the underlying science is apt to be flawed because the Native American gene databases for tribes in the U.S. are so thin –- making conclusions like Bustamante's all but useless from a scientific perspective. "It's hard to say that there is a definitive conclusion, especially if someone has such small amounts of Native American ancestry," said Dr. Nanibaa’ Garrison, a faculty member in the Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics at Seattle Children’s Research Institute. "When you're testing someone who might have an ancestor more than four or five generations back, that's when it becomes very hard to piece out that ancestor from all the other ancestors that the person has," Garrison added. "It's not a yes or no answer."
Andre
🚐 23:06, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Muboshgu: While Warren has more recently walked back her claim to be fully Native American, the category is for those who claim "Native American Descent". This is different. After the many meetings during the campaigns she admitted she's not a citizen of a Nation (which Native Americans already knew), and has no tribal ties (ditto), but she still makes the distant ancestry claims - with the disputed DNA test and her statements about her ancestors. The cat exists precisely for people who aren't citizens, and who have no proven ancestry, but believe they have ancestry "somewhere back there" (in addition to those who make what others believe are simply false claims). She fits the category. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 20:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Warren was a diversity hire, she is the only Harvard professors till that time whograduated from a public college.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-09-21/from-oklahoma-to-harvard-elizabeth-warren-trod-a-tricky-path
Unselfstudier (
talk) 20:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
the Dr. Phil story, while not currently cited this way, was cited in several articles and biographical profiles of Warren. I'll look. Andre 🚐 05:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the area where the article lists children, it says "2, including Amelia". It is know that that Warren's children are Amelia Warren Tyagi and Alexander Warren. It would be useful to change the information to include Alexander Warren, as of current it is difficult to glean his existence from the current article. Thanks for reading, and have a great day! Emrehozchan ( talk) 13:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As a former chair of hiring and advancement at Harvard, I take exception with you ludicrous statement that Ms Warren received no preferential consideration due to her claims of indigenous heritage. You lose credibility when you cover for her. This site, which I have given substantial donations to,absolutely must show the good, bad, and ugly, otherwise you are nothing. 2601:249:8780:6530:4D57:406:3A73:8FBD ( talk) 07:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Elizabeth Warren article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about editors' personal viewpoints or political talking points. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about editors' personal viewpoints or political talking points at the Reference desk. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Elizabeth Warren has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on June 22, 2017, and June 22, 2022. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
/info/en/?search=Elizabeth_Warren#Ancestry_and_Native_American_relations
'Throughout his presidency, former president Donald Trump mocked Warren for her assertions of Native American ancestry, and called her the slur "Pocahontas".'
I struggle to see how it can be justified to refer to that as a "slur". Maybe some left leaning publications do, but does a majority of publications? From what I've seen the answer is no.
'At a July 2018 Montana rally, he promised that if he debated Warren, he would pay $1 million to her favorite charity if she could prove her Native American ancestry via a DNA test. Warren released results of a DNA test in October 2018, then asked Trump to donate the money to the National Indigenous Women's Resource Center. Trump responded by denying that he had made the challenge. The DNA test found that Warren's ancestry is mostly European but "strongly support[ed] the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor", likely "in the range of 6 to 10 generations ago".'
Very misleading, Trump challenged her to take a DNA test that "shows you’re an Indian". Clearly having the same amount of Native DNA as any random white American doesn't satisfy that. Also the 'Trump responded by denying that he made the challenge' is also misleading as fact checked here - https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/oct/15/context-donald-trumps-1-million-offer-elizabeth-wa/
'The DNA test found that Warren's ancestry is mostly European but "strongly support[ed] the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor", likely "in the range of 6 to 10 generations ago".'
This is potentially misleading to viewers unless we note that this is the same amount of ancestry that a random white American is likely to have. 84.70.169.190 ( talk) 07:56, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Can we get a correction on the $1m bet? Trump challenged her to take a DNA test that "shows you’re an Indian", not "prove her Native American ancestry" as the article currently says. And he never denied that he made that challenge - https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/oct/15/context-donald-trumps-1-million-offer-elizabeth-wa/ 84.70.169.190 ( talk) 14:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
The subsection "Ancestry and Native American relations" in the larger public image section seems a little weird to me. You have 5 paragraphs on her ancestry controversy, and then the section ends with two sentences about Deb Haaland's praise and endorsement of her. I have no objection to the information itself, but it just seems weird to have it in a section that is overwhelmingly focused on the issue of her ancestry. Why not move the Haaland endorsement sentence to somewhere in the section on her presidential campaign instead? 2600:8800:4CE0:E400:7D60:3525:5CF3:500D ( talk) 05:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Warren started her second term in 2019, not 2017. 2600:4040:5C67:9000:D474:A782:52F1:9780 ( talk) 00:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Pete unseth has recently reverted me to re-add the
Category:Academics who falsely claimed minority ancestry to this page. Respecting
WP:BRD, but also keeping in mind the
WP:BLP imperative that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion
, I will restate my rationale here before re-reverting.
WP:BLPCAT states: Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources
. The name of the category is "Academics who falsely claimed minority ancestry". The problem with this is that I haven't seen a reliable source which states that she "falsely claimed minority ancestry." Sure, I've seen reliable sources affirming that she is not a member of a tribe, and that she should not be considered 'racially' Native American. But I haven't seen any source debunking the idea that she had a Native American ancestor, which is what the category name is saying. Because of this, I feel that it's not appropriate for this category to remain on the page of a living person.
MediaKill13 (
talk) 10:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
false. To my understanding, if a claim cannot be proven one way or another, it is not true or false, but unproven, or indeterminate. The question I'm asking myself is, would it be acceptable to have a sentence in the article saying 'Elizabeth Warren's claims to Native American ancestry have been proven false?'. Even in the section discussing her claims, nowhere in Wikipedia's voice is it stated that her claims were false, which is what the category name does. MediaKill13 ( talk) 08:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
This recent edit has a misstatement of the source
[12] First of all it takes the "South American" thing out of context. The full quote is Bustamante has said that due to limited Native America databases, he compared Warren’s DNA sample to recent samples from indigenous populations in South America rather than Native Americans in the U.S.
, which does not say they weren't Native American. They were Native South American. Secondly the overall conclusion from the piece you gave was 'Not a yes or no answer' None of the experts and industry executives who spoke to ABC News -- including scientists who have worked with Bustamante -- directly refuted his conclusions. Instead, they contended that the underlying science is apt to be flawed because the Native American gene databases for tribes in the U.S. are so thin –- making conclusions like Bustamante's all but useless from a scientific perspective. "It's hard to say that there is a definitive conclusion, especially if someone has such small amounts of Native American ancestry," said Dr. Nanibaa’ Garrison, a faculty member in the Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics at Seattle Children’s Research Institute. "When you're testing someone who might have an ancestor more than four or five generations back, that's when it becomes very hard to piece out that ancestor from all the other ancestors that the person has," Garrison added. "It's not a yes or no answer."
Andre
🚐 23:06, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Muboshgu: While Warren has more recently walked back her claim to be fully Native American, the category is for those who claim "Native American Descent". This is different. After the many meetings during the campaigns she admitted she's not a citizen of a Nation (which Native Americans already knew), and has no tribal ties (ditto), but she still makes the distant ancestry claims - with the disputed DNA test and her statements about her ancestors. The cat exists precisely for people who aren't citizens, and who have no proven ancestry, but believe they have ancestry "somewhere back there" (in addition to those who make what others believe are simply false claims). She fits the category. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 20:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Warren was a diversity hire, she is the only Harvard professors till that time whograduated from a public college.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-09-21/from-oklahoma-to-harvard-elizabeth-warren-trod-a-tricky-path
Unselfstudier (
talk) 20:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
the Dr. Phil story, while not currently cited this way, was cited in several articles and biographical profiles of Warren. I'll look. Andre 🚐 05:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the area where the article lists children, it says "2, including Amelia". It is know that that Warren's children are Amelia Warren Tyagi and Alexander Warren. It would be useful to change the information to include Alexander Warren, as of current it is difficult to glean his existence from the current article. Thanks for reading, and have a great day! Emrehozchan ( talk) 13:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As a former chair of hiring and advancement at Harvard, I take exception with you ludicrous statement that Ms Warren received no preferential consideration due to her claims of indigenous heritage. You lose credibility when you cover for her. This site, which I have given substantial donations to,absolutely must show the good, bad, and ugly, otherwise you are nothing. 2601:249:8780:6530:4D57:406:3A73:8FBD ( talk) 07:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)