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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
do they refer to the party at the given time? not sure republicans from past can be identified with republicans from the present.. so maybe common colour is misleading? 178.148.11.105 ( talk) 11:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
It's quite interesting to see all the different denominations of Christianity of the US Presidents. Would it benefit the article if somewhere we could have a chart of presidents by religion, so this information can be seen at a glance without opening their individual articles? Considering the significance of religion in US politics, it seems appropriate. I was, for example, quite surprised to see that Richard Nixon was a Quaker. -- IronMaidenRocks ( talk) 07:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Somewhat unnecessary. We have an article on Religious affiliations of Presidents of the United States which both discusses the religious affiliations of Presidents and then lists them. Including in controversial cases, like Abraham Lincoln where the primary sources and people who knew him personally disagreed on whether he was a believing Christian.
As for Nixon, he was not apparently a particularly religious Quaker. The list notes: "Contrary to Quaker custom, Nixon swore the oath of office at both of his inaugurations. He also engaged in military service, contrary to the Quaker doctrine of pacifism." He was actually the second Quaker president, following Herbert Hoover. Dimadick ( talk) 17:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Links for the C-SPAN series American Presidents: Life Portraits have been assigned to each entry in this list for some time (since at least 2009). However, at some point since the list was last reviewed, C-SPAN has changed their URLs and changed their website(s) such that the URLs as they were now point to the same page, here: http://www.c-span.org/series/?presidents . However, the individual programs (such as this one for George Washington) are still up as videos. I am going to go through and replace the URLs that point to the americanpresidents.org site with URLs for the individual programs for each president. (I will also adjust the title and access date as needed.) Any concerns, let's discuss. KConWiki ( talk) 02:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Please list Ronald Reagan as the most recently serving president to die. Various gubernatorial pages give a list of living governors with a mention the most recent one to die and, if different, the most recently serving office holder to die. Since Reagan served after the most recent president to die, Ford, I think he should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.126.81.6 ( talk) 17:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Correct "Bill" Clinton (William Jefferson Clinton) and Barack Obama (Barack Hussein Obama II). Using the common name for these and not for other presidents is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpkaplan ( talk • contribs) 15:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Correct spelling of "Barrack" to "Barack" Obama. Dizzytired ( talk) 04:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
In the section: "List of presidents", the color for the independents is white, i don't think that's a good choice, is almost unnoticeable, i would suggest grey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Il giovane bello 73 ( talk • contribs) 14:57, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
why Kansas? in 1952 he was from New York and 1956 Pennsylvania — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.1.203 ( talk) 02:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I agree, that column should be deleted. the home states column simply causes too much controversy, and sometimes does not have a clear or definite answer AvRand ( talk) 06:18, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
John Quincy Adams was a member of the Federalist Party, not a member of the Democratic-Republican Party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.67.7.151 ( talk) 11:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
This list lists the Presidents in the party they were in while they were President, therefore, you don't see Abraham Lincoln as a Whig, or Theodore Roosevelt as a Progressive. AvRand ( talk) 06:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Living Former Preisdents section, can you make a note of the fact that Ronald Reagan was the most recently serving President to die? On lists of state governors, in the living former office holder sections on those pages, they list the most recent serving office holder to die, if said persons was different from the most recent officer holder to die, regardless of time served. Since the Most recent president to die, Gerald Ford, served before Reagan, the same distinction applies here. 2601:241:300:C930:2C2E:C97D:2562:F1D2 ( talk) 01:18, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
My edit removing MDY dates in favour of MY dates of each birth and death of each US president was recently reverted by Drdpw for removing "good information" and such changes being "unnecessary". I beg to differ. The full dates of birth/death are really unnecessary for the List. If someone wants to know the exact date of birth of George H. W. Bush for example? They would click on his link on the list. I strongly believe that the full dates of birth and dates of death on this article should at least be shortened from e.g. February 6, 1911 – June 5, 2004 to February 1911 – June 2004, MonthYear rather than MonthDayYear. It would make the article much cleaner and more compact, without delving into much detail and without removing substantial information.-- Neve – selbert 11:05, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I have just now shortened both the dates of birth and death of each president from MonthDayYear to just Year. It does look a lot cleaner and compact this way, in my opinion.-- Neve – selbert 21:32, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
I have refined (trimmed & simplified) the format of the list of presidents. The two main changes I made were: removed the vice president column (plus the associated party color coding column), and removed the previous office column. I removed the VP column because there's a separate list article of VPs, and because this is a list of PsOTUS, not Ps&VPsOTUS. I removed the previous office column because there are other articles that list those, and in several cases, the information seems trivial or only loosely germane. I hope I made the list more user friendly. Drdpw ( talk) 13:31, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Additionally, I have removed theindividual former presidents' photos from the living presidents section. Having these photos right below the other photos is (even though different) redundant. I also restored group image to standard thumbnail format. Drdpw ( talk) 20:13, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I think the VP party color column has a couple of problems
After thinking about this for a while, I came up with the following suggestions for reorganizing the columns:
The advantages and disadvantages of this include
Other things I think would be helpful
Comments? YBG ( talk) 20:38, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
<br/>
mark-ups are not unnecessary at all. They should be returned, there was no consensus to remove them whatsoever. The full dates for the Vice Presidents are also quite superflous. What exactly is wrong with noting that VP Rockefeller "(Began: December 19, 1974)". Most readers would understand that he ended his term on the same day Ford ended his. Why you are so intent on complicating and cluttering the table is quite simply beyond me.--
Neve
–
selbert 03:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Spartan7W, YBG: As things are deteriorating into an edit war between myself & Neve-selbert, I am disengaging and would ask you both to intervene and help me, and perhaps Neve-selbert also, to see our dueling edits (attempts to enhance this list) with fresh eyes. Thanks. Drdpw ( talk) 04:15, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
President | Presidency [a] |
Party | Election | Previous service | Vice President | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
37 |
Richard Nixon 1913–1994 (Lived: 81 years) |
January 20, 1969 – August 9, 1974 [b] |
Republican | 46 ( 1968) |
36th Vice President of the United States (1953–61) |
Spiro Agnew (Resigned: October 10, 1973) | |||
47 ( 1972) | |||||||||
Office vacant [c] | |||||||||
Gerald Ford (Began: December 6, 1973) [d] | |||||||||
38 |
Gerald Ford 1913–2006 (Lived: 93 years) |
August 9, 1974 – January 20, 1977 |
Republican |
40th Vice President of the United States |
Office vacant [c] | ||||
Nelson Rockefeller (Began: December 19, 1974) |
Question, why are the presidents' dates in office formatted as they are?
– January 20, 2021 |
rather than | January 20, 2017 – January 20, 2021 |
Drdpw ( talk) 15:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Also, for former presidents, I see no injury done by including recent photographs of them. Each has aged considerably since their portrait; Carter is 35 years older, Bush 41 is 23 years older, and Clinton and Bush 43 are each in their 70s now (or practically) and are considerably older in appearance. Showing what each looks like in the last few years is a nice added bonus. Including their name is logical, especially for accessibility, and they few characters it takes to list their term of office and age does not harm. Spartan7W § 22:56, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
All I ask for is consistency, here & at List of Vice Presidents of the United States. -- GoodDay ( talk) 09:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Anyone know how to correct Clinton's position in the article? his second term as Veep, should be under Pres Madison. GoodDay ( talk) 21:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Several comments have been made on this page about the desire for formatting consistency between the List of Presidents of the United States table and one at List of Vice Presidents of the United States. I’ve been working refining the VP table so that the formatting is similar, and would appreciate input before I post it. Please, take a look at it in my sandbox, and leave any comments about it at the List of Vice Presidents of the United States talk page. Thanks. Drdpw ( talk) 23:48, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The fact that Clinton was impeached from office is not noted; however, the fact that Nixon resigned from office was included. Are you trying to distort history? 172.249.82.36 ( talk) 17:55, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The article lists the 4 presidents that won the election but lost the popular vote. For completeness and to prevent bias, it should also list the 3 presidents (Carter, Kennedy and JQ Adams) that won the election but did not carry a majority of the states. The two ties (Garfield and Taylor) could also be noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.214.115.237 ( talk) 18:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
The number of states has just as much bearing as does the popular vote (that is not really much), as the electoral votes are a combination of the number of senators (state based) and congressmen (population based). I see now that this entire section has been eliminated, and that makes sense, as both of these are just trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.214.115.237 ( talk) 16:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
In all these years, I had not seen (or known about) this article before. The table is very well done; one of the best I've seen. However, the lead section is a different story, and one of the main things is the image of the White House. What would be a good reason to have it in this article? We all know that the president lives in the White House, and we all know what it looks like. Per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE, a lead image "must be significant and relevant in the topic's context", not just related. An image is not required for a lead, and this one certainly doesn't need two. And if an image needs such a long caption, that means that it shouldn't be a lead image, because the lead image needs little-to-no captioning ( WP:Manual of Style/Captions#Infoboxes and leading images). Also, this lead is too long as it is. A lead should be no longer than four paragraphs ( WP:LEAD), and this is a list article, so there shouldn't be much prose. The lead should just be long enough to adequately explain the following list. And the image just makes the section even longer. — Musdan77 ( talk) 18:27, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Presidentiad, which redirects to this page, is a term used by Walt Whitman to refer to Lincoln's 1861-65 term in the poem Year of Meteors, 1859-60, apparently a reference to the 1860 Great Meteor. Maybe we could use this term in the column header instead of "election". YBG ( talk) 08:19, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Why this article shows ligth blue color for democrats while the main article (of democratic party) shows dark blue? I think we should replace ligth blue with dark blue, as it was before.-- Elelch ( talk) 21:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
In the "party color" column I chose to use the current Democratic Party meta color ( ) rather than the color currently used in the "party color" column for presidents on the presidents list page ( ). I did so because is the status quo meta color. There is currently a discussion at Template talk:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color#Rfc: #3333FF or #34AAE0 on which color should be used as the meta color for the U.S. Democratic Party. Please join that discussion if you wish to express your view on this topic.
Agree. The current meta color ( ) is also the most used in the media to identify democratic party, so people is widely accustomed to it.-- Elelch ( talk) 17:13, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Question: In the 'Election' column, how should the dates of the first Presidential election be written?
Arguments could be made for each of these, but I tend to prefer 1 or 2 because 3 and 4 don't really tell the full story. But which should we use, 1 or 2? Looking at MOS:DATERANGE, it says that "the range's end year is usually given in full", but then it goes on to add:
This says that we may use the "1788–89" in either of two situations (a) when the two years are consecutive or (b) in infoboxes or tables. The MOS does not require us to use "1788–89", but allows us to choose between "1788–1789" and "1788–89" if either of these conditions applies. In this case, both conditions apply and so we certainly are allowed to use either format. And given this choice, I prefer "1788–89" to conserve space. If we use "1788–1789", that forces the column to be wider. It isn't a lot wider, but it is wider, and every little bit helps in a wide table such as this one. YBG ( talk) 05:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
We should aim to be consistent here. If we go about #2, we should aim to go about implementing this format with the entire table. It just looks inconsistent otherwise.-- Nevé – selbert 19:53, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
The second term of Abraham Lincoln, and the only term of Andrew Johnson, should be colored separately to denote that they were in the National Union Party at that time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleyece ( talk • contribs) 18:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Here they are: YBG ( talk) 01:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
POTUS with columns moved
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
References
|
VP with columns moved
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
References
|
Just in case any is needed ... YBG ( talk) 01:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Inserting a new section here so that the previous sections can be preserved intact. YBG ( talk) 23:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Drdpw, GoodDay, JFG, and YBG: I know this is kinda off-topic with regard to improving the article (we can collapse this minor discussion later), but I just wanted to know your feelings about the result on Thursday, if I may. What was your reaction? I'm still pretty stunned, TBH.-- Nevé – selbert 22:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Stay calm, remain vigilant, and above all, be not afraid. Drdpw ( talk) 23:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
What about combining the first two columns?
|
|
|
|
My motivation is primarily to save the small bit of horizontal real estate. I've presented two ways of combining the columns, but I'm sure there are other alternatives also. YBG ( talk) 05:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Proposal by Neve-selbert | ||
|
I think this would be an interesting addition. How old was the individual when they taken office. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 19:27, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
In the last week I've noticed a number of editors changing the godawful image of President-elect Trump, and I honestly can't blame them. It is of noisy quality and makes Trump look like more of a fool than he already is. As much as I absolutely loathe the man, I don't see why exactly we have to follow the consensus at Donald Trump and keep the August 2015 image in its place on this article also. Here are the alternatives:
I'm OK with any except C and E, IMO even more appalling than the current image.-- Nevé – selbert 06:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Currently, the image used for Barack Obama is File:President Barack Obama.jpg. I was thinking we could use File:President Barack Obama (cropped).jpg, in order to get a better closeup of his face, in the style of most other presidents on this list. Thoughts? MB298 ( talk) 20:09, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change Donald Trump's name in the president-elect sub-section to Donald J. Trump 24.225.153.187 ( talk) 05:35, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
During the pre-election discussion, a consensus was reached as to how each of the two major party candidates would be represented in this table should they be elected. This list uses the article title Donald Trump, not the redirect Donald J. Trump. Wikipedia articles are titled according to the policy at WP:COMMONNAME. In my opinion, if a consensus is reached to change the title of that article, then (and only then) should the item in this list be changed. Nevertheless, thank you so much for your desire to improve this encyclopedia. YBG ( talk) 05:48, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
A friend of mine has pointed out that Trump isn't technically the President Elect until the Electoral College votes. In the meantime, he's the Presumptive President Elect. Is this true? KingTor ( talk) 15:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
I removed "Chairman of The Trump Organization (1971–present)" from the 'Previous Service' column entry for Donald Trump, on the grounds that this isn't voluntary, military or elected public service, leaving "No prior public service." JFG has reverted, saying "The mention of Trump's prior business role has consensus; see Talk:List of Presidents of the United States#Layout for the president-elect". I'm not seeing anything in that section that discusses that entry on the table, just lots of argument about whether or not 'Inauguration Day' should be pipedlinked or not - so no, there is no consensus. In fact, the only mention of previous service (by Spartan7W) appears after the discussion was closed, and that user also questions the inclusion of chairmanship of a business. In fact, in reply to Spartan7W's comment, JFG says "Regarding the mention of his private business, I would leave this decision to an editorial debate after the election (if Trump wins)." The election is now over... Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
In my view, the "prior service" column is meant to show what was the highest position held by each President before his election. Turns out that most of them had a high-level public role, some of them had a high-level military role, and now one of them had a high-level business role. This information says what has been those people's greatest accomplishments before winning the Presidency. If you look at it that way, Trump's role as the builder of a business empire over 40 years is just as significant a mark of accomplishment as earning a Senate seat or leading a military force. — JFG talk 22:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Presidency | President | Previous service | Party | Election | Vice President | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
45 | December 2, 2016 – Incumbent |
Steve Jobs 1955–2011 (Lived: 56 years) |
CEO of Apple Inc. (1997–2011) (No prior public service) |
Nonpartisan | ? | Tim Cook |
A question for the group (and possible alternative), given that these articles exist: List of Presidents of the United States by other offices held, List of Presidents of the United States by previous experience, List of Presidents of the United States by military service, and List of United States Presidents by military rank, is it necessary or vitally important that this list have a "previous service" column at all? Putting a {{ details}} (For more details on) with the notation "topic=the public and personal career of each U.S. President, see ... [list of the above mentioned articles]" might be a more effective way to connect readers with information information on the pre-presidency lives of American presidents. Drdpw ( talk) 15:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
After looking back over the above discussion, I was bold and did the following: I added a notation to the Previous service column header stating, "Listed here, unless otherwise noted, is the position (either with a U.S. state or the federal government, or with a private corporation) held by the individual immediately prior to becoming President of the United States." I think this wording is clear and makes the definition of "previous service" (previous position might be a better term to use, as we're listing positions of service in that column) to encompass those who were "Ambassador to", "Secretary or Governor of" or U.S. Rep. or Senator from", "Supreme Allied Commander", and "Chairman of" (yes, it's no longer necessary to state "No prior public service" in the Trump row). I also changed the negative sounding statement, "No prior elected office", into a positive sounding one, "First elected office", and moved the new statement to the dates of presidency column. I did so because it seemed a better place for this fact to be highlighted. If others think it belongs someplace else, it can be moved, no problem. Cheers. Drdpw ( talk) 20:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Should the prior position be the position held immediately prior to being President (as currently stated in the {{ efn}}) or should it be the highest position held? I rather think the latter, but I'm not sure how many (if any) of the Presidents it would impact. Comments? YBG ( talk) 05:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@ JFG: Shouldn't it be placed in the prior service column? Placing it in the term column has nothing to do with the duration of office itself. MB298 ( talk) 07:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the
help page).
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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
do they refer to the party at the given time? not sure republicans from past can be identified with republicans from the present.. so maybe common colour is misleading? 178.148.11.105 ( talk) 11:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
It's quite interesting to see all the different denominations of Christianity of the US Presidents. Would it benefit the article if somewhere we could have a chart of presidents by religion, so this information can be seen at a glance without opening their individual articles? Considering the significance of religion in US politics, it seems appropriate. I was, for example, quite surprised to see that Richard Nixon was a Quaker. -- IronMaidenRocks ( talk) 07:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Somewhat unnecessary. We have an article on Religious affiliations of Presidents of the United States which both discusses the religious affiliations of Presidents and then lists them. Including in controversial cases, like Abraham Lincoln where the primary sources and people who knew him personally disagreed on whether he was a believing Christian.
As for Nixon, he was not apparently a particularly religious Quaker. The list notes: "Contrary to Quaker custom, Nixon swore the oath of office at both of his inaugurations. He also engaged in military service, contrary to the Quaker doctrine of pacifism." He was actually the second Quaker president, following Herbert Hoover. Dimadick ( talk) 17:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Links for the C-SPAN series American Presidents: Life Portraits have been assigned to each entry in this list for some time (since at least 2009). However, at some point since the list was last reviewed, C-SPAN has changed their URLs and changed their website(s) such that the URLs as they were now point to the same page, here: http://www.c-span.org/series/?presidents . However, the individual programs (such as this one for George Washington) are still up as videos. I am going to go through and replace the URLs that point to the americanpresidents.org site with URLs for the individual programs for each president. (I will also adjust the title and access date as needed.) Any concerns, let's discuss. KConWiki ( talk) 02:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Please list Ronald Reagan as the most recently serving president to die. Various gubernatorial pages give a list of living governors with a mention the most recent one to die and, if different, the most recently serving office holder to die. Since Reagan served after the most recent president to die, Ford, I think he should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.126.81.6 ( talk) 17:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Correct "Bill" Clinton (William Jefferson Clinton) and Barack Obama (Barack Hussein Obama II). Using the common name for these and not for other presidents is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpkaplan ( talk • contribs) 15:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Correct spelling of "Barrack" to "Barack" Obama. Dizzytired ( talk) 04:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
In the section: "List of presidents", the color for the independents is white, i don't think that's a good choice, is almost unnoticeable, i would suggest grey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Il giovane bello 73 ( talk • contribs) 14:57, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
why Kansas? in 1952 he was from New York and 1956 Pennsylvania — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.1.203 ( talk) 02:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I agree, that column should be deleted. the home states column simply causes too much controversy, and sometimes does not have a clear or definite answer AvRand ( talk) 06:18, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
John Quincy Adams was a member of the Federalist Party, not a member of the Democratic-Republican Party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.67.7.151 ( talk) 11:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
This list lists the Presidents in the party they were in while they were President, therefore, you don't see Abraham Lincoln as a Whig, or Theodore Roosevelt as a Progressive. AvRand ( talk) 06:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Living Former Preisdents section, can you make a note of the fact that Ronald Reagan was the most recently serving President to die? On lists of state governors, in the living former office holder sections on those pages, they list the most recent serving office holder to die, if said persons was different from the most recent officer holder to die, regardless of time served. Since the Most recent president to die, Gerald Ford, served before Reagan, the same distinction applies here. 2601:241:300:C930:2C2E:C97D:2562:F1D2 ( talk) 01:18, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
My edit removing MDY dates in favour of MY dates of each birth and death of each US president was recently reverted by Drdpw for removing "good information" and such changes being "unnecessary". I beg to differ. The full dates of birth/death are really unnecessary for the List. If someone wants to know the exact date of birth of George H. W. Bush for example? They would click on his link on the list. I strongly believe that the full dates of birth and dates of death on this article should at least be shortened from e.g. February 6, 1911 – June 5, 2004 to February 1911 – June 2004, MonthYear rather than MonthDayYear. It would make the article much cleaner and more compact, without delving into much detail and without removing substantial information.-- Neve – selbert 11:05, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I have just now shortened both the dates of birth and death of each president from MonthDayYear to just Year. It does look a lot cleaner and compact this way, in my opinion.-- Neve – selbert 21:32, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
I have refined (trimmed & simplified) the format of the list of presidents. The two main changes I made were: removed the vice president column (plus the associated party color coding column), and removed the previous office column. I removed the VP column because there's a separate list article of VPs, and because this is a list of PsOTUS, not Ps&VPsOTUS. I removed the previous office column because there are other articles that list those, and in several cases, the information seems trivial or only loosely germane. I hope I made the list more user friendly. Drdpw ( talk) 13:31, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Additionally, I have removed theindividual former presidents' photos from the living presidents section. Having these photos right below the other photos is (even though different) redundant. I also restored group image to standard thumbnail format. Drdpw ( talk) 20:13, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I think the VP party color column has a couple of problems
After thinking about this for a while, I came up with the following suggestions for reorganizing the columns:
The advantages and disadvantages of this include
Other things I think would be helpful
Comments? YBG ( talk) 20:38, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
<br/>
mark-ups are not unnecessary at all. They should be returned, there was no consensus to remove them whatsoever. The full dates for the Vice Presidents are also quite superflous. What exactly is wrong with noting that VP Rockefeller "(Began: December 19, 1974)". Most readers would understand that he ended his term on the same day Ford ended his. Why you are so intent on complicating and cluttering the table is quite simply beyond me.--
Neve
–
selbert 03:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Spartan7W, YBG: As things are deteriorating into an edit war between myself & Neve-selbert, I am disengaging and would ask you both to intervene and help me, and perhaps Neve-selbert also, to see our dueling edits (attempts to enhance this list) with fresh eyes. Thanks. Drdpw ( talk) 04:15, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
President | Presidency [a] |
Party | Election | Previous service | Vice President | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
37 |
Richard Nixon 1913–1994 (Lived: 81 years) |
January 20, 1969 – August 9, 1974 [b] |
Republican | 46 ( 1968) |
36th Vice President of the United States (1953–61) |
Spiro Agnew (Resigned: October 10, 1973) | |||
47 ( 1972) | |||||||||
Office vacant [c] | |||||||||
Gerald Ford (Began: December 6, 1973) [d] | |||||||||
38 |
Gerald Ford 1913–2006 (Lived: 93 years) |
August 9, 1974 – January 20, 1977 |
Republican |
40th Vice President of the United States |
Office vacant [c] | ||||
Nelson Rockefeller (Began: December 19, 1974) |
Question, why are the presidents' dates in office formatted as they are?
– January 20, 2021 |
rather than | January 20, 2017 – January 20, 2021 |
Drdpw ( talk) 15:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Also, for former presidents, I see no injury done by including recent photographs of them. Each has aged considerably since their portrait; Carter is 35 years older, Bush 41 is 23 years older, and Clinton and Bush 43 are each in their 70s now (or practically) and are considerably older in appearance. Showing what each looks like in the last few years is a nice added bonus. Including their name is logical, especially for accessibility, and they few characters it takes to list their term of office and age does not harm. Spartan7W § 22:56, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
All I ask for is consistency, here & at List of Vice Presidents of the United States. -- GoodDay ( talk) 09:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Anyone know how to correct Clinton's position in the article? his second term as Veep, should be under Pres Madison. GoodDay ( talk) 21:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Several comments have been made on this page about the desire for formatting consistency between the List of Presidents of the United States table and one at List of Vice Presidents of the United States. I’ve been working refining the VP table so that the formatting is similar, and would appreciate input before I post it. Please, take a look at it in my sandbox, and leave any comments about it at the List of Vice Presidents of the United States talk page. Thanks. Drdpw ( talk) 23:48, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The fact that Clinton was impeached from office is not noted; however, the fact that Nixon resigned from office was included. Are you trying to distort history? 172.249.82.36 ( talk) 17:55, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The article lists the 4 presidents that won the election but lost the popular vote. For completeness and to prevent bias, it should also list the 3 presidents (Carter, Kennedy and JQ Adams) that won the election but did not carry a majority of the states. The two ties (Garfield and Taylor) could also be noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.214.115.237 ( talk) 18:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
The number of states has just as much bearing as does the popular vote (that is not really much), as the electoral votes are a combination of the number of senators (state based) and congressmen (population based). I see now that this entire section has been eliminated, and that makes sense, as both of these are just trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.214.115.237 ( talk) 16:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
In all these years, I had not seen (or known about) this article before. The table is very well done; one of the best I've seen. However, the lead section is a different story, and one of the main things is the image of the White House. What would be a good reason to have it in this article? We all know that the president lives in the White House, and we all know what it looks like. Per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE, a lead image "must be significant and relevant in the topic's context", not just related. An image is not required for a lead, and this one certainly doesn't need two. And if an image needs such a long caption, that means that it shouldn't be a lead image, because the lead image needs little-to-no captioning ( WP:Manual of Style/Captions#Infoboxes and leading images). Also, this lead is too long as it is. A lead should be no longer than four paragraphs ( WP:LEAD), and this is a list article, so there shouldn't be much prose. The lead should just be long enough to adequately explain the following list. And the image just makes the section even longer. — Musdan77 ( talk) 18:27, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Presidentiad, which redirects to this page, is a term used by Walt Whitman to refer to Lincoln's 1861-65 term in the poem Year of Meteors, 1859-60, apparently a reference to the 1860 Great Meteor. Maybe we could use this term in the column header instead of "election". YBG ( talk) 08:19, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Why this article shows ligth blue color for democrats while the main article (of democratic party) shows dark blue? I think we should replace ligth blue with dark blue, as it was before.-- Elelch ( talk) 21:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
In the "party color" column I chose to use the current Democratic Party meta color ( ) rather than the color currently used in the "party color" column for presidents on the presidents list page ( ). I did so because is the status quo meta color. There is currently a discussion at Template talk:Democratic Party (United States)/meta/color#Rfc: #3333FF or #34AAE0 on which color should be used as the meta color for the U.S. Democratic Party. Please join that discussion if you wish to express your view on this topic.
Agree. The current meta color ( ) is also the most used in the media to identify democratic party, so people is widely accustomed to it.-- Elelch ( talk) 17:13, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Question: In the 'Election' column, how should the dates of the first Presidential election be written?
Arguments could be made for each of these, but I tend to prefer 1 or 2 because 3 and 4 don't really tell the full story. But which should we use, 1 or 2? Looking at MOS:DATERANGE, it says that "the range's end year is usually given in full", but then it goes on to add:
This says that we may use the "1788–89" in either of two situations (a) when the two years are consecutive or (b) in infoboxes or tables. The MOS does not require us to use "1788–89", but allows us to choose between "1788–1789" and "1788–89" if either of these conditions applies. In this case, both conditions apply and so we certainly are allowed to use either format. And given this choice, I prefer "1788–89" to conserve space. If we use "1788–1789", that forces the column to be wider. It isn't a lot wider, but it is wider, and every little bit helps in a wide table such as this one. YBG ( talk) 05:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
We should aim to be consistent here. If we go about #2, we should aim to go about implementing this format with the entire table. It just looks inconsistent otherwise.-- Nevé – selbert 19:53, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
The second term of Abraham Lincoln, and the only term of Andrew Johnson, should be colored separately to denote that they were in the National Union Party at that time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleyece ( talk • contribs) 18:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Here they are: YBG ( talk) 01:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
POTUS with columns moved
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
References
|
VP with columns moved
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
References
|
Just in case any is needed ... YBG ( talk) 01:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Inserting a new section here so that the previous sections can be preserved intact. YBG ( talk) 23:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Drdpw, GoodDay, JFG, and YBG: I know this is kinda off-topic with regard to improving the article (we can collapse this minor discussion later), but I just wanted to know your feelings about the result on Thursday, if I may. What was your reaction? I'm still pretty stunned, TBH.-- Nevé – selbert 22:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Stay calm, remain vigilant, and above all, be not afraid. Drdpw ( talk) 23:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
What about combining the first two columns?
|
|
|
|
My motivation is primarily to save the small bit of horizontal real estate. I've presented two ways of combining the columns, but I'm sure there are other alternatives also. YBG ( talk) 05:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Proposal by Neve-selbert | ||
|
I think this would be an interesting addition. How old was the individual when they taken office. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 19:27, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
In the last week I've noticed a number of editors changing the godawful image of President-elect Trump, and I honestly can't blame them. It is of noisy quality and makes Trump look like more of a fool than he already is. As much as I absolutely loathe the man, I don't see why exactly we have to follow the consensus at Donald Trump and keep the August 2015 image in its place on this article also. Here are the alternatives:
I'm OK with any except C and E, IMO even more appalling than the current image.-- Nevé – selbert 06:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Currently, the image used for Barack Obama is File:President Barack Obama.jpg. I was thinking we could use File:President Barack Obama (cropped).jpg, in order to get a better closeup of his face, in the style of most other presidents on this list. Thoughts? MB298 ( talk) 20:09, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of Presidents of the United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change Donald Trump's name in the president-elect sub-section to Donald J. Trump 24.225.153.187 ( talk) 05:35, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
During the pre-election discussion, a consensus was reached as to how each of the two major party candidates would be represented in this table should they be elected. This list uses the article title Donald Trump, not the redirect Donald J. Trump. Wikipedia articles are titled according to the policy at WP:COMMONNAME. In my opinion, if a consensus is reached to change the title of that article, then (and only then) should the item in this list be changed. Nevertheless, thank you so much for your desire to improve this encyclopedia. YBG ( talk) 05:48, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
A friend of mine has pointed out that Trump isn't technically the President Elect until the Electoral College votes. In the meantime, he's the Presumptive President Elect. Is this true? KingTor ( talk) 15:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
I removed "Chairman of The Trump Organization (1971–present)" from the 'Previous Service' column entry for Donald Trump, on the grounds that this isn't voluntary, military or elected public service, leaving "No prior public service." JFG has reverted, saying "The mention of Trump's prior business role has consensus; see Talk:List of Presidents of the United States#Layout for the president-elect". I'm not seeing anything in that section that discusses that entry on the table, just lots of argument about whether or not 'Inauguration Day' should be pipedlinked or not - so no, there is no consensus. In fact, the only mention of previous service (by Spartan7W) appears after the discussion was closed, and that user also questions the inclusion of chairmanship of a business. In fact, in reply to Spartan7W's comment, JFG says "Regarding the mention of his private business, I would leave this decision to an editorial debate after the election (if Trump wins)." The election is now over... Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
In my view, the "prior service" column is meant to show what was the highest position held by each President before his election. Turns out that most of them had a high-level public role, some of them had a high-level military role, and now one of them had a high-level business role. This information says what has been those people's greatest accomplishments before winning the Presidency. If you look at it that way, Trump's role as the builder of a business empire over 40 years is just as significant a mark of accomplishment as earning a Senate seat or leading a military force. — JFG talk 22:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Presidency | President | Previous service | Party | Election | Vice President | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
45 | December 2, 2016 – Incumbent |
Steve Jobs 1955–2011 (Lived: 56 years) |
CEO of Apple Inc. (1997–2011) (No prior public service) |
Nonpartisan | ? | Tim Cook |
A question for the group (and possible alternative), given that these articles exist: List of Presidents of the United States by other offices held, List of Presidents of the United States by previous experience, List of Presidents of the United States by military service, and List of United States Presidents by military rank, is it necessary or vitally important that this list have a "previous service" column at all? Putting a {{ details}} (For more details on) with the notation "topic=the public and personal career of each U.S. President, see ... [list of the above mentioned articles]" might be a more effective way to connect readers with information information on the pre-presidency lives of American presidents. Drdpw ( talk) 15:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
After looking back over the above discussion, I was bold and did the following: I added a notation to the Previous service column header stating, "Listed here, unless otherwise noted, is the position (either with a U.S. state or the federal government, or with a private corporation) held by the individual immediately prior to becoming President of the United States." I think this wording is clear and makes the definition of "previous service" (previous position might be a better term to use, as we're listing positions of service in that column) to encompass those who were "Ambassador to", "Secretary or Governor of" or U.S. Rep. or Senator from", "Supreme Allied Commander", and "Chairman of" (yes, it's no longer necessary to state "No prior public service" in the Trump row). I also changed the negative sounding statement, "No prior elected office", into a positive sounding one, "First elected office", and moved the new statement to the dates of presidency column. I did so because it seemed a better place for this fact to be highlighted. If others think it belongs someplace else, it can be moved, no problem. Cheers. Drdpw ( talk) 20:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Should the prior position be the position held immediately prior to being President (as currently stated in the {{ efn}}) or should it be the highest position held? I rather think the latter, but I'm not sure how many (if any) of the Presidents it would impact. Comments? YBG ( talk) 05:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@ JFG: Shouldn't it be placed in the prior service column? Placing it in the term column has nothing to do with the duration of office itself. MB298 ( talk) 07:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the
help page).