This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Rahm Emanuel 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 |
![]() | Rahm Emanuel 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. | |||||||||
|
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 the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
I've heard various rumors about that, which I don't believe, but I don't see any discussion here -- perhaps I missed it (sorry, if so). Did he volunteer for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)? If so, what oath did he have to swear/sign? Is he a dual-citizen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DBrnstn ( talk • contribs) 07:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
But if he did serve as a volunteer in a foreign army, even if it were Israel, then did he take an oath of allegiance to the State of Israel? If so, did he ever renounce the oath, or is he still bound by his oath of absolute allegiance to a foreign nation? (unsigned)
Neither in this section nor in the article itself do I see a clear, simple answer to the clear, simple question: does Rahm Israel Emanuel hold Israeli citizenship? I see that an opponent of his candidacy in an old political race asserted that Emanuel did hold Israeli citizenship, but I see no statement that Emanuel actually did or does.
Does anyone know the answer? Is it verifiable? Firstorm ( talk) 12:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Any person anywhere in the world who's mother is considered jewish by the state of Israel, can freely get israeli citizenship. I have no knowledge of whether Emmanuel has done that or not. Under US law, you lose your American citizenship if you serve in a foreign army. If you are repairing a foreign army's trucks during a war, I think it's a fair argument that that is "serving" in a foreign army. The threats of anti-semitism for questioning this take on his "volunteerism" are beneath contempt. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
If no one spells it out, tag gets removed. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 19:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Raum is now calling for the 1 million persons (about 1 in 320 americans, after foreigners are removed) who are on the no fly or S lists to be banned from owning guns. After it was revealed how inaccurate these lists are (persons such as Senator Ted Kennedy appeared on the list, luckily he knows the right people to get removed, the rest have no chance), this is very controversial. It should be mentioned, it's been getting some mainstream coverage. Terrorlistforlife ( talk) 06:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
his father was a member of the Irgun, a group that blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. was this ever brought up in the media? Statesboropow ( talk) 04:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
i understand that and i appreciate your imput. but could you imagine the uproar in the media if he was the son of Arafat? Statesboropow ( talk) 22:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
We have really got to cut out all the sugarcoating. Irgun was, plain and simple, a terrorist group and it is certainly appropriate to mention. While it is certainly true that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter--Irgun's fight was more to take land and to boot the native people off of it, by any means necessary--theft, murder, deception, etc. By any definition, that's more of a terrorist group than Hezbollah and Hamas combined.
When we can cut out the BS, we can start living together in a civilized fashion and actually work out our issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.19.182 ( talk) 02:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
This mention of irgun is extraordinarily inappropriate. My fellow students and I each stopped reading the article at the mention of "irgun". It is not present on the pages of his brothers; it is a gross hyperbole that distracts from the content of the article; it does not seem relevant to an article about the current White House Chief of Staff . Statesboropow demands hyperbole: he is seeking for an "uproar in the media". I would urge editors to revert his changes and be skeptical of language that does not belong in an encyclopedia entry.-- 140.247.251.29 ( talk) 23:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
---
After several months of peace on this topic, editors are again inserting characterizations of Irgun into the text. Discusion of Irgun tactics and related issues belongs on the Irgun page, not here. Irgun is not the subject of this article. Rahm Emanuel was not affiliated with Irgun. MarkBernstein ( talk) 06:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Lots of wiki bio pages discuss parental histories, so if a parent is affiliated with a terrorist group this is relevant to this article.-- Xris0 ( talk) 06:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
If his father was a member of the Klu Klux Klan, it would be mentioned. Also, the article should be clarified to indicate (as it once did) that the family took the name Emanuel to honor his uncle, an Irgun terrorist, killed in the Israeli-Arab war of 1948.Someone has whitewashed this page. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm new, so I hope this is the appropriate place. If Rahm's page said "his father was a member of the Irgun." with a PERIOD at the end, that would be one thing. But his page says "the Irgun, a Jewish paramilitary organization." SURELY, someone can see the politics in allowing ONE DESCRIPTION and not the other... Isn't that political editing? To allow the benign "paramilitary", but not the sinister "terrorist"... But under the Irgun listing in wiki, it has a link: ISRAEL CLASSIFIED IRGUN AS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION... How much more info do we need to call it a "terrorist organization"?? Seriously; this isn't a viewpoint. The gov't of Israel said it. Why can't we? And yes, I feel that stating that Rahm is the son of a terrorist is information that should be included, as is that he was named after a dead terrorist. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Tomstedham (
talk •
contribs)
16:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Mark: Although I believe you have political motivitions for your statement, I agree. Either a noun should be used alone (ie, "Irgun". Period...) or ANY DESCRIPTION will be argued over forever. That was my original point. "Hey, X says this. Why isn't it listed?" "No, Y states this; I'm changing it!" And on and on and on. So, can somebody go to that spot and change it, please? It still says "... Irgun, a Jewish paramilitary organization." Let's meet in the middle and just say "Irgun." Period. I can live with that. But why can't we say "terrorist" on the actual Irgun page? It keeps being changed there, too.
Lisa: I'm not familiar with the inner workings of Israeli politics 60+ years ago. I'll take your word for it. I'm quite sure that no-one in Libya's gov't today considers any other members to be "terrorists" either, or the gov't in South Africa, or Serbia, for that matter. That doesn't change reality. I served in Bosnia, and I've been to Srebrenica, to the mine where thousands died. None of those responsible for those terrible crimes felt they were "terrorists" or "war criminals", but thankfully a court believed otherwise.
Serious question: if "political infighting" is the sole reason for changing the designation of the Irgun, then surely some MORE "political infighting" can change it back! Either planting bombs in marketplaces is terrorism, or it isn't. Isn't "political infighting" a really, really bad way to figure out how to label actions? Especially actions in which lots of people, quite a few of whom were civilians, died?
To me, it is sad that a gov't will change its view of actions based on the political leanings of its current members. It's wrong for Hamas to bomb civilians, but not for Irgun??? Israel gave medals to Irgun members, but is outraged when streets are named after Hamas members... It just seems strange to me. "My terrorism is different than your terrorism!"
Aaaaaand now we see why there are problems on wiki, huh? I want Irgun classified as "terrorist" because I believe it committed well-documented acts of terrorism. Why does someone NOT want it classified that way? Seriously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomstedham ( talk • contribs) 21:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC) -- Tomstedham ( talk) 21:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Mark: My apologies if I offended you, but I stick by what I said. From reading your edits and comments here... well, I believe you have, as we say in Alabama, "a dog in this hunt." Meaning, I believe you are interjecting your religious/political views into your edits. I calls it like I sees it, as we say...-- Tomstedham ( talk) 23:38, 21 March 2011 (UTC) Doesn't "good faith" only apply to what we post on an actual wiki page, not here in the talk section? I'm not completely familiar with the particulars. -- Tomstedham ( talk) 23:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Lisa: Seriously??? "The Irgun never put bombs in marketplaces"??? Are we arguing about the definition of "marketplace"??? Have you read Wiki's own section about the Irgun, and the " List of Irgun attacks"? I'll only quote a few, to keep this short: 1938, June (late) Unspecified number of Arabs killed by a bomb that was thrown into a crowded Arab market place in Jerusalem. 1938, July 6 18 Arabs and 5 Jews were killed by two simultaneous bombs in the Arab melon market in Haifa. 1938, July 16 10 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Jerusalem. 1938, July 25 43 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Haifa. 1938, August 26 24 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Jaffa. 1938, February 27 33 Arabs were killed in multiple attacks, incl. 24 by bomb in Arab market in Suk Quarter of Haifa and 4 by bomb in Arab vegetable market in Jerusalem. 1939, May 29 5 Arabs were killed by a mine detonated at the Rex cinema in Jerusalem.
So, on Wiki, we have a clear list of MARKET ATTACKS, by the Irgun, with sources... would you now care to re-examine your statement?
Heh heh... I believe that I have "backed up my claims about the Irgun killing lots of civilians, as you requested. Perhaps it is YOU who is "nothing more than a hate-filled agitator, trying to use Wikipedia to support your personal agenda" as you so eloquently accused me... I'll wait here (eagerly) for your comment... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomstedham ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC) -- Tomstedham ( talk) 01:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm wrong but didn't they also blow up a hotel and leave two booby-trapped captains hanging from trees, where any old unfortunate soul walking past could have disturbed them. I think Lisa's ability to selectively choose historical accuracies in order to paint a picture of the irgun as an honest 'tea drinking society' is naivety-max and clearly leading to the disease of pleb-propaganda that ruins oh so many of these wikipedia articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.93.188.216 ( talk) 10:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Just noticed that this article is repeatedly B class and/or low priority. Chief of Staff of the greatest empire on the planet? I think we can up the rating on those categories, don't you?? CarolMooreDC ( talk) 22:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Are you guys kidding me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.61.226.88 ( talk) 16:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Are Rahm's views guided by Klein's "Shock Doctrine"?
[He once said, “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.”] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.179.189 ( talk) 17:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I've made the following additions to the Rahm Emanuel article.
1. I've identified him as Jewish-American
2. I've added that he served as a volunteer in the Israeli Defense Forces.
These are both objective facts. Two users have deleted these facts and I'd like to know why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.252 ( talk) 13:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I have sourced all the facts I've added to Rahm Emanuel's biography.
Please tell me why these facts should not be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.252 ( talk) 13:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Tom - I checked the guidelines re: ethnicity. It states the following: Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. I would argue that his ethnicity is very relevant. He has very strong ties to the Jewish-American community and Israel. Also, he is very unique in that he volunteered to serve with a foreign army while the United States was at war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.252 ( talk) 13:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
"Actually, he did not serve with a foreign army." Ummm, yes he did... The popular internet tale is that he did "brake work" on IDF trucks, briefly. I didn't say he served IN a foreign army, or that he was a member of, or enlisted, or whatever legal rigamorole would explain the difference. The fact is that the US sent troops into combat, and he chose not to serve WITH/IN/FOR/AROUND/NEAR the US forces, he chose to help the military of a foreign power. You can justify it, you can lawyer it, whatever. "But Israel is our ally." So? The fact is that when I was in the desert serving the US, he wasn't. Period. So, when discussing loyalties and allegiances, as they say on cop shows, "Goes to motive, Your Honor."--
Tomstedham (
talk)
17:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I know I've seen a few issues about him with numerous WP:RS. I'm sure that a few could be added. If you need help, see a news google search of his name for 2009 here. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 19:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Emanuel frustrated Chicago peace activists who lobbied his office to reverse course on the Iraq war. [2]
Emanuel is an influential member of the New Democrat Coalition. citation needed He is noted for his combative style. [1]
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
Just wondering who added the 'duche bag' to the content there?????!!!! I just looked at the page and it said near the top "...Emanuel was elected duche bag chairman of the Democratic Caucus."
I don't think the person who added this edit should be allowed to edit any more wiki pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.209.17 ( talk) 18:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
In defense of whoever wrote that, he is a "douche bag". That isn't in dispute; is it? In fact in the Wikipedia entry for "douche bag", the main portrait used for Rahm Emanuel here should be used to illustrate what a typical douche bag looks like. In the context for this article, he should be called a "partisan douche bag". -- 2600:6C65:747F:CD3F:34A0:259:48BE:4934 ( talk) 12:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Could someone elaborate on this man's ties to the government of Israel, which is, of course, a foreign entity? I believe his brother is active in the Mossad, and he may be as well. This is rather disturbing, considering his importance in the governmental hierarchy of the US. His authority should be disallowed if that is the case, first of all, because the Chief of Staff should have no allegiance before that to the nation which he serves. Even citizenship status should be called into question, as this man no doubt has duel citizenship with Israel and the US together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.201.171.193 ( talk) 02:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I was troubled by RE's "volunteering" with the IDF, which I view as the equivalent of "serving" in the IDF, so I went to the State Department website to see what type of military service with a foreign government will jeopardize US citizenship. As you can see from the following, it's virtually impossible, short of a renounciation of US citizenship to have you citizenship revoked if you are not fighting for an enemy of the US:
"POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING ACTS
Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include: ....
3.entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);
ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARD OF EVIDENCE
As already noted, the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship only if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government."
So, as long as RE wasn't an officer in the IDF, it's okay. To me, it's still problematic for a COS to have served with a foreign government, especially one whose relationship with the US is so fraught with issues, but it's a moot point now. I just wish RE would display his passport and settle the issue. FrancisDane ( talk) 14:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
the article states that "Moskal also charged that Emanuel had dual citizenship with Israel and had served in the Israeli Army.[35] Emanuel did not serve in the Israeli army, but was a civilian volunteer assisting the Israel Defense Forces for a short time during the 1991 Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases with Sar-El."
so the article addresses the idf claim, but it doesn't address the veracity of the claim that he has dual citizenship - us and israeli. are there any reliable source as to whether or not he ever attained israeli citizenship? i've heard it alleged many times, but don't know if it's true,and the article doesn't answer the question :-/
to be clear, the question isn't whether or not he has us citizenship, but whether or not he *also* has israeli citizenship. 84.138.193.138 ( talk) 22:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
See above. Ilya123 ( talk) 06:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
If his father was born in Jerusalem, he was entitled to claim dual citizenship when he was 18. It appears that he did not choose to do so. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Are people seriously unconvinced of the Massa and Emanuel encounter that is rampant on the news and internet? LaRouxEMP ( talk) 19:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Yeah Mark, because it's still a rumor when the Washington Post does multiple reports on it. LaRouxEMP ( talk) 21:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
So what that it is "brouhaha" as you address it? Do the visitors of Wikipedia not deserve to acknowledge the allegations against the current White House Chief of Staff? LaRouxEMP ( talk) 11:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
"Yeah Mark, because it's still a rumor when the Washington Post does multiple reports on it. LaRouxEMP (talk) 21:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)" if this is so re multiple reports, include in article!-- Xris0 ( talk) 06:10, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
I have added that on the occasion of the Bar-Mitzvah of his son, both Rahm Emanuel and his son visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem. I gave the link to an article in The Jerusalem Post. Now, an individual, repeatedly erases this information, with one particular comment, if Rahm had spent $50,000. on the occasion, that would be news... One has to understand that there are currently talks about peace in the Middle East. Rahm Emmanuel is involved in the process. Nevertheless, he took time off to go on a private visit to Jerusalem to celebrate the Bar-Mitzvah of his son. He could have done the celebration in the U.S. He decided to do it in Jerusalem. This is certainly worth adding. ( Highland14 ( talk) 20:12, 31 May 2010 (UTC))
I deleted
because mercy and lofty (rahamim and rahm) are from totally different roots in Hebrew. Benqish ( talk) 06:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
I really would like the dual citizenship thing figured out. I know he's been accused of it and I've done a bit of searching and a story that seems to be getting passed around the news is that he had dual citizenship but relinquished it when he turned 18. But, just because the news passes this around doesn't mean it's legit. Anyone know anything about this?-- Louiedog ( talk) 14:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
He's not a dual citizen. MarkBernstein ( talk) 14:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
It seems to be missing a few important controversies while putting in silly ones. I'll put it on my long list of things to do, but just wanted to make that note. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 15:49, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
You are very current in the first paragraph: former, but need to follow through in the third: current. I did not read the whole article so there may be other similar.
Rahm Israel Emanuel[1] (pronounced /ˈrɑːm/; born November 29, 1959) is an American politician and former White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama. He served previously as senior advisor to President Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998 and as a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives, representing Illinois's 5th congressional district, from 2003 until his resignation in 2009 to take up his position in the Obama Administration.
Emanuel was chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the 2006 mid-term elections and remained a top strategist for House Democrats during the 2008 cycle. After Democrats regained control of the House in 2006, Emanuel was elected chairman of the Democratic Caucus. This made him the fourth-ranking House Democrat, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn.[2]
Two days after Obama's election victory, he was announced as Barack Obama's designate for White House Chief of Staff.[3] Emanuel resigned from the House on January 2, 2009[4] and began his current job on January 20, 2009, the day of Obama's inauguration.[3] 72.248.203.99 ( talk) 13:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
As with Wikipedia's standards on including controversies sections, one needs to be added to make this a fair article. Research should be conducted in order to "dig up" any piece of controversy you can find, just like is done on virtually any other biography. My research so far has found his quote "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste; they are opportunities to do big things." ↑ http://biggovernment.com/tfitton/2010/10/14/is-scandal-ridden-rahmbo-chicagos-next-mayor/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.146.207.98 ( talk) 18:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I disagree, Mr. Bernstein. I primarily know of this individual as a controversial figure in the Democratic party, and assume that is true for many others. I came to this article to find out what the controversy was about and why he is so particularly disliked by conservatives. Reading his entire, very lengthy article is not an efficient way to do that. You are so active on this talk page (and without even looking, surely the edit history) I'm sure his entire article reads exactly the way YOU want it to read. It would be interesting to know where your political alliances lie. Single or small groups of individuals aggressively dominating the discussion of an article and its edits is a major problem on Wikipedia, this article is a clear example of why. 173.68.18.98 ( talk) 17:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Fat and Happy, concerning this revert [3] and whether or not RE is a Chicago political insider (which he is, and that's not exactly a crime), would you characterize the similar claim that Gery Chico is a Chicago political insider in the lead of his article worthy of reverting too? Or is that also an "unsourced characterization of undemonstrated (sic) relevance"? Dr. Dan ( talk) 01:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I understand that he served as a presidential appointee on Freddie Mac's board for 14 months. That's a fact. [Maybe someone should also point out that the board met only 6 times a year and that Rahm supposedly did nothing while he was on the board, earning about $50K for each board meeting, which by the way are often done by teleconference.] What I find incredible is how he could leave Freddie Mac to run for congress and then, as per the article, be appointed to a congressional subcommittee overseeing Freddie and Fannie. In order to avoid a conflict he would have to recuse himself from every meeting of the subcommittee. Something doesn't make sense here. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
According to the source cited in the article ( [4]):
Members of Chicago's Jewish community say Emanuel's wife Amy, who converted to Judaism around the same time as her wedding, is heavily involved with the Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School in Lakeview, Ill.
The couple send their 6-year-old son, Zacharias, and 3-year-old Ilana to the Conservative Jewish day school, which Emanuel himself attended as a child.
So if we're going according to that source, BZAEDS is Conservative. However, their own site says:
The Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School and Anshe Emet Synagogue are separate institutions each governed by an independent board of trustees. The school and synagogue share physical facilities and they value a synergistic, collaborative learning relationship that includes the celebration of life cycle events and holidays.
That's a close affiliation by any standard. So please stop removing it. - Lisa ( talk - contribs) 13:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
This article says Emanuel is Chicago's 55th mayor. The chronology of mayors on the Chicago Public library site says he is 46th. There is one acting mayor they do not include in the official count. The chronology is here: http://www.chipublib.org/cplbooksmovies/cplarchive/mayors/mayorlist.php
129.105.175.116 ( talk) 21:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC) Steve Duke
A question regarding this sentence : "Emanuel's personal involvement in health care reform was made public when it was reported that he had used overtly assertive and potentially threatening tactics towards Democrats who did not toe the party line while in the shower at the House gym"
Is it fair to say he did this toward "Democrats"?, the only story I can recall when this occured was involving Eric Massa who referenced this in a few interviews but should this description be fair to say "Democrats" instead of "Massa"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasow187 ( talk • contribs) 04:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The source cited claimed that Emanuel did this to "Democrats" but gave no example. Then again, the source was a very politically charged column piece. I have replaced it with a hard news piece with the facts about Massa. It has been reported that if this happened to Massa, it probably didn't happen to someone else, and we should figure out how that could be worded best. TylerRDavis ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC).
Hi, glad to see you've chosen to review the article I've nominated. I'm just wondering what you think should improved if possible for this to be a GA. Sorry if I'm being rude, it's just that most reviewers don't start unless they already have comments. Thanks, Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 05:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. It's getting there, it's close I think. I will try and put in some time. The GA review notes mention 2 weeks which gives us til about 12/19. As far as what else it needs, here's some suggestions for us for this week:
Thanks again. Hugh ( talk) 19:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
This review has been on for nearly two weeks now, and I must reaffirm I believe it should pass. As far as I can tell the only recent edits made by you are just copyedits, nothing major. The only thing not passed in your review is 3b, focusing on the topic without going into unnecessary detail, which it sufficentallly passses. I've gone over this article pleanty of times and I can't see any violations, and I believe now is the time for it to be passed. Thanks for all your work. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 00:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: HughD ( talk · contribs) 04:23, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | A genuinely enjoyable read.
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Lead reads somewhat dry, offices and dates, no sense of the person, could be expanded. Consider bumping the "Political positions" section (I'm not a big fan of such sections, preferring to let the facts speak) into the preceding congressman section, when the subject had a voting record and the positions were verifiable. As mayor issues such as his approach toward unions, privatisation of public jobs, lack of transparency, and others are not universally associated with "generally liberal" positions. No lists; nice table of election results; the voter turnout was not 100%. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Some redirects in urls in refs. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Good in-line citation style without being obtrusive, except for maybe the same ref 3x in a row in the Clinton campaign graph, probably once at the end is enough. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Good coverage of a diverse career. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | The Youth service section seems like it is mostly about Obama's program. Consider expanding the mayoralty section. Consider adding a link to the transition plan under "works" and mentioning it under "mayoralty," a pol issuing the criteria by which he is to be judged is notable. Under mayoralty consider adding the Trib's lawsuit over the schedule and other FOIA requests. Consider adding the infrastructure trust and the support of the Council. Consider moving the "popular culture" and "West Wing" sentences to the White House Chief of staff section, where they fit more chronologically. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Perhaps somewhat favorable. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No edit warring or content dispute. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All images tagged with copyright status; no fair use images, mostly federal images. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Consider adding to caption of last image, "Emanuel (left)..." |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | pass |
Based on Rahm Emanuel's story about how his family got their unusual Jewish last name, Mr. Emanuel must be descended from Meir Auerbach who was in the right place at the right time.
Anonymous 71.164.209.8 ( talk) 03:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
It is perhaps worth mentioning that on 27th of September 2007 Rahm Emanuel was awarded the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland, 4th class, by the President of Poland Lech Kaczyński for his services towards the development of Polish-American relationships. He officially accepted his award on May the 3rd 2008. http://expatpol.com/index.php?stsid=32179 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZoodaVex ( talk • contribs) 01:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Isn't "Rahm" a nickname for "Avrahm," which is a form of "Abraham"? 98.110.35.39 ( talk) 14:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)Kurt Hanswurst
Could someone, who knows how to do it properly, please move the 2011 Mayoral Election box down and to the left, beneath the U. S. House of Representatives Election box? The way it's presently formatted makes the display run off the right-hand edge and requiring a scroll to the right. This should also make room for adding the 2015 mayoral election. Thanks. Milkunderwood ( talk) 22:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Its in the article, maybe it needs a photo? Victor Grigas ( talk) 02:16, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Sure. Hugh ( talk) 02:42, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps the most important section, the mayoral tenure, needs updating. Seeking collaborators. Prefer an integrated, topical approach as per WP:Criticism#Integrated_throughout_the_article. Suggest an approach, we keep the "Tenure" subsection around for miscellaneous content that does not yet warrant a subtopic. Looking at the current tenure and criticism sections, see obvious opportunities for subsections on "Transparency," "Police-community relations," "Public education," and others. What do you think? Hugh ( talk) 20:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:36, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
chopper 287 paul u need toback the real deb e and the qiyam we had family on the car crash 3788025 Ezt scabbled the scct cxall alaksa
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the Mayor of Chicago Elections 2011 section where it saids and was sworn in as the 55th mayor of Chicago, 55th should say 44th. 2600:1702:AB0:D890:9F:1131:A74C:3227 ( talk) 07:13, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove "(Acting)" from next to Pete Rouse's name. Pete Rouse is not the acting White House Chief of Staff. 140.233.180.36 ( talk) 22:16, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template.
Alucard 16
❯❯❯ chat?
00:54, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the infobox where it saids office, in the top paragraph where it saids serving as Mayor of Chicago|44th, and under the Mayor of Chicago Elections 2011 section where it saids and was sworn in as the 44th mayor of Chicago, 44th should say 51st because Rahm Emanuel is the 51st mayor of Chicago. 2600:1702:AB0:D890:504:F686:C973:CE6A ( talk) 08:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
For someone who is regularly on the newspapers for being disliked and hated by the African community in Chicago. And facing a steady barrage of “Resign Rahm” protests in 2016. [5] and countless media headlines and even published books about why the people in Chicago gave him such low ratings as a major of Chicago and protesting for many months just for his resignation. It's amazing how none of that is being mentioned in the article. Why is that? There's also so many other stuff on other criticisms like his insensitive remarks towards Hispanics, Asian Americans and how the Black community believe he had no credibility in helping them as a major. But I added merely two things but the article really needs to mention these things about the black community protests against his tenure, and not sweep it under a rug. [6] [7] 49.180.16.205 ( talk) 00:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
3 days ago, the 'Mayor history chapter' talks about 2015 and then jumps to 2019 and completely skips entire years of 2016, 2017 and 2018 without good reason. There's particularly no reason at all to not talk about 2016 in that chapter when media often talked about the public rage against him for his handling of Laquan McDonald shooting video, so I now added that year in. [8] And there were shamefully zero mentions of any black Chicago protests against him as if it's being scrubbed by editors despite the Black community often protests against him in that year. The anger and protests is just so quietly buried deep with a ridiculous amount of irrelevant information and been summarised as public scrutiny in barely a sentence. [9] Editors can't keep constantly removing all that information about his low ratings as Chicago mayor in that year 2016 or the community anger towards him. Discuss in talk and give a valid reason why information about his record low ratings or the protests against him, needs to be reduced from public view? I read the article 2 days ago, and shockingly found it so difficult to notice any information about 2016 or the Chicago Black community protests against him. 49.179.72.173 ( talk) 13:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Rahm Emanuel 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 |
![]() | Rahm Emanuel 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. | |||||||||
|
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 the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
I've heard various rumors about that, which I don't believe, but I don't see any discussion here -- perhaps I missed it (sorry, if so). Did he volunteer for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)? If so, what oath did he have to swear/sign? Is he a dual-citizen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DBrnstn ( talk • contribs) 07:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
But if he did serve as a volunteer in a foreign army, even if it were Israel, then did he take an oath of allegiance to the State of Israel? If so, did he ever renounce the oath, or is he still bound by his oath of absolute allegiance to a foreign nation? (unsigned)
Neither in this section nor in the article itself do I see a clear, simple answer to the clear, simple question: does Rahm Israel Emanuel hold Israeli citizenship? I see that an opponent of his candidacy in an old political race asserted that Emanuel did hold Israeli citizenship, but I see no statement that Emanuel actually did or does.
Does anyone know the answer? Is it verifiable? Firstorm ( talk) 12:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Any person anywhere in the world who's mother is considered jewish by the state of Israel, can freely get israeli citizenship. I have no knowledge of whether Emmanuel has done that or not. Under US law, you lose your American citizenship if you serve in a foreign army. If you are repairing a foreign army's trucks during a war, I think it's a fair argument that that is "serving" in a foreign army. The threats of anti-semitism for questioning this take on his "volunteerism" are beneath contempt. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
If no one spells it out, tag gets removed. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 19:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Raum is now calling for the 1 million persons (about 1 in 320 americans, after foreigners are removed) who are on the no fly or S lists to be banned from owning guns. After it was revealed how inaccurate these lists are (persons such as Senator Ted Kennedy appeared on the list, luckily he knows the right people to get removed, the rest have no chance), this is very controversial. It should be mentioned, it's been getting some mainstream coverage. Terrorlistforlife ( talk) 06:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
his father was a member of the Irgun, a group that blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. was this ever brought up in the media? Statesboropow ( talk) 04:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
i understand that and i appreciate your imput. but could you imagine the uproar in the media if he was the son of Arafat? Statesboropow ( talk) 22:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
We have really got to cut out all the sugarcoating. Irgun was, plain and simple, a terrorist group and it is certainly appropriate to mention. While it is certainly true that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter--Irgun's fight was more to take land and to boot the native people off of it, by any means necessary--theft, murder, deception, etc. By any definition, that's more of a terrorist group than Hezbollah and Hamas combined.
When we can cut out the BS, we can start living together in a civilized fashion and actually work out our issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.19.182 ( talk) 02:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
This mention of irgun is extraordinarily inappropriate. My fellow students and I each stopped reading the article at the mention of "irgun". It is not present on the pages of his brothers; it is a gross hyperbole that distracts from the content of the article; it does not seem relevant to an article about the current White House Chief of Staff . Statesboropow demands hyperbole: he is seeking for an "uproar in the media". I would urge editors to revert his changes and be skeptical of language that does not belong in an encyclopedia entry.-- 140.247.251.29 ( talk) 23:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
---
After several months of peace on this topic, editors are again inserting characterizations of Irgun into the text. Discusion of Irgun tactics and related issues belongs on the Irgun page, not here. Irgun is not the subject of this article. Rahm Emanuel was not affiliated with Irgun. MarkBernstein ( talk) 06:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Lots of wiki bio pages discuss parental histories, so if a parent is affiliated with a terrorist group this is relevant to this article.-- Xris0 ( talk) 06:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
If his father was a member of the Klu Klux Klan, it would be mentioned. Also, the article should be clarified to indicate (as it once did) that the family took the name Emanuel to honor his uncle, an Irgun terrorist, killed in the Israeli-Arab war of 1948.Someone has whitewashed this page. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm new, so I hope this is the appropriate place. If Rahm's page said "his father was a member of the Irgun." with a PERIOD at the end, that would be one thing. But his page says "the Irgun, a Jewish paramilitary organization." SURELY, someone can see the politics in allowing ONE DESCRIPTION and not the other... Isn't that political editing? To allow the benign "paramilitary", but not the sinister "terrorist"... But under the Irgun listing in wiki, it has a link: ISRAEL CLASSIFIED IRGUN AS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION... How much more info do we need to call it a "terrorist organization"?? Seriously; this isn't a viewpoint. The gov't of Israel said it. Why can't we? And yes, I feel that stating that Rahm is the son of a terrorist is information that should be included, as is that he was named after a dead terrorist. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Tomstedham (
talk •
contribs)
16:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Mark: Although I believe you have political motivitions for your statement, I agree. Either a noun should be used alone (ie, "Irgun". Period...) or ANY DESCRIPTION will be argued over forever. That was my original point. "Hey, X says this. Why isn't it listed?" "No, Y states this; I'm changing it!" And on and on and on. So, can somebody go to that spot and change it, please? It still says "... Irgun, a Jewish paramilitary organization." Let's meet in the middle and just say "Irgun." Period. I can live with that. But why can't we say "terrorist" on the actual Irgun page? It keeps being changed there, too.
Lisa: I'm not familiar with the inner workings of Israeli politics 60+ years ago. I'll take your word for it. I'm quite sure that no-one in Libya's gov't today considers any other members to be "terrorists" either, or the gov't in South Africa, or Serbia, for that matter. That doesn't change reality. I served in Bosnia, and I've been to Srebrenica, to the mine where thousands died. None of those responsible for those terrible crimes felt they were "terrorists" or "war criminals", but thankfully a court believed otherwise.
Serious question: if "political infighting" is the sole reason for changing the designation of the Irgun, then surely some MORE "political infighting" can change it back! Either planting bombs in marketplaces is terrorism, or it isn't. Isn't "political infighting" a really, really bad way to figure out how to label actions? Especially actions in which lots of people, quite a few of whom were civilians, died?
To me, it is sad that a gov't will change its view of actions based on the political leanings of its current members. It's wrong for Hamas to bomb civilians, but not for Irgun??? Israel gave medals to Irgun members, but is outraged when streets are named after Hamas members... It just seems strange to me. "My terrorism is different than your terrorism!"
Aaaaaand now we see why there are problems on wiki, huh? I want Irgun classified as "terrorist" because I believe it committed well-documented acts of terrorism. Why does someone NOT want it classified that way? Seriously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomstedham ( talk • contribs) 21:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC) -- Tomstedham ( talk) 21:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Mark: My apologies if I offended you, but I stick by what I said. From reading your edits and comments here... well, I believe you have, as we say in Alabama, "a dog in this hunt." Meaning, I believe you are interjecting your religious/political views into your edits. I calls it like I sees it, as we say...-- Tomstedham ( talk) 23:38, 21 March 2011 (UTC) Doesn't "good faith" only apply to what we post on an actual wiki page, not here in the talk section? I'm not completely familiar with the particulars. -- Tomstedham ( talk) 23:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Lisa: Seriously??? "The Irgun never put bombs in marketplaces"??? Are we arguing about the definition of "marketplace"??? Have you read Wiki's own section about the Irgun, and the " List of Irgun attacks"? I'll only quote a few, to keep this short: 1938, June (late) Unspecified number of Arabs killed by a bomb that was thrown into a crowded Arab market place in Jerusalem. 1938, July 6 18 Arabs and 5 Jews were killed by two simultaneous bombs in the Arab melon market in Haifa. 1938, July 16 10 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Jerusalem. 1938, July 25 43 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Haifa. 1938, August 26 24 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Jaffa. 1938, February 27 33 Arabs were killed in multiple attacks, incl. 24 by bomb in Arab market in Suk Quarter of Haifa and 4 by bomb in Arab vegetable market in Jerusalem. 1939, May 29 5 Arabs were killed by a mine detonated at the Rex cinema in Jerusalem.
So, on Wiki, we have a clear list of MARKET ATTACKS, by the Irgun, with sources... would you now care to re-examine your statement?
Heh heh... I believe that I have "backed up my claims about the Irgun killing lots of civilians, as you requested. Perhaps it is YOU who is "nothing more than a hate-filled agitator, trying to use Wikipedia to support your personal agenda" as you so eloquently accused me... I'll wait here (eagerly) for your comment... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomstedham ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC) -- Tomstedham ( talk) 01:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm wrong but didn't they also blow up a hotel and leave two booby-trapped captains hanging from trees, where any old unfortunate soul walking past could have disturbed them. I think Lisa's ability to selectively choose historical accuracies in order to paint a picture of the irgun as an honest 'tea drinking society' is naivety-max and clearly leading to the disease of pleb-propaganda that ruins oh so many of these wikipedia articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.93.188.216 ( talk) 10:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Just noticed that this article is repeatedly B class and/or low priority. Chief of Staff of the greatest empire on the planet? I think we can up the rating on those categories, don't you?? CarolMooreDC ( talk) 22:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Are you guys kidding me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.61.226.88 ( talk) 16:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Are Rahm's views guided by Klein's "Shock Doctrine"?
[He once said, “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.”] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.179.189 ( talk) 17:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I've made the following additions to the Rahm Emanuel article.
1. I've identified him as Jewish-American
2. I've added that he served as a volunteer in the Israeli Defense Forces.
These are both objective facts. Two users have deleted these facts and I'd like to know why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.252 ( talk) 13:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I have sourced all the facts I've added to Rahm Emanuel's biography.
Please tell me why these facts should not be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.252 ( talk) 13:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Tom - I checked the guidelines re: ethnicity. It states the following: Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. I would argue that his ethnicity is very relevant. He has very strong ties to the Jewish-American community and Israel. Also, he is very unique in that he volunteered to serve with a foreign army while the United States was at war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.252 ( talk) 13:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
"Actually, he did not serve with a foreign army." Ummm, yes he did... The popular internet tale is that he did "brake work" on IDF trucks, briefly. I didn't say he served IN a foreign army, or that he was a member of, or enlisted, or whatever legal rigamorole would explain the difference. The fact is that the US sent troops into combat, and he chose not to serve WITH/IN/FOR/AROUND/NEAR the US forces, he chose to help the military of a foreign power. You can justify it, you can lawyer it, whatever. "But Israel is our ally." So? The fact is that when I was in the desert serving the US, he wasn't. Period. So, when discussing loyalties and allegiances, as they say on cop shows, "Goes to motive, Your Honor."--
Tomstedham (
talk)
17:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I know I've seen a few issues about him with numerous WP:RS. I'm sure that a few could be added. If you need help, see a news google search of his name for 2009 here. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 19:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Emanuel frustrated Chicago peace activists who lobbied his office to reverse course on the Iraq war. [2]
Emanuel is an influential member of the New Democrat Coalition. citation needed He is noted for his combative style. [1]
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)
Just wondering who added the 'duche bag' to the content there?????!!!! I just looked at the page and it said near the top "...Emanuel was elected duche bag chairman of the Democratic Caucus."
I don't think the person who added this edit should be allowed to edit any more wiki pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.209.17 ( talk) 18:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
In defense of whoever wrote that, he is a "douche bag". That isn't in dispute; is it? In fact in the Wikipedia entry for "douche bag", the main portrait used for Rahm Emanuel here should be used to illustrate what a typical douche bag looks like. In the context for this article, he should be called a "partisan douche bag". -- 2600:6C65:747F:CD3F:34A0:259:48BE:4934 ( talk) 12:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Could someone elaborate on this man's ties to the government of Israel, which is, of course, a foreign entity? I believe his brother is active in the Mossad, and he may be as well. This is rather disturbing, considering his importance in the governmental hierarchy of the US. His authority should be disallowed if that is the case, first of all, because the Chief of Staff should have no allegiance before that to the nation which he serves. Even citizenship status should be called into question, as this man no doubt has duel citizenship with Israel and the US together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.201.171.193 ( talk) 02:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I was troubled by RE's "volunteering" with the IDF, which I view as the equivalent of "serving" in the IDF, so I went to the State Department website to see what type of military service with a foreign government will jeopardize US citizenship. As you can see from the following, it's virtually impossible, short of a renounciation of US citizenship to have you citizenship revoked if you are not fighting for an enemy of the US:
"POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING ACTS
Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include: ....
3.entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);
ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARD OF EVIDENCE
As already noted, the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship only if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government."
So, as long as RE wasn't an officer in the IDF, it's okay. To me, it's still problematic for a COS to have served with a foreign government, especially one whose relationship with the US is so fraught with issues, but it's a moot point now. I just wish RE would display his passport and settle the issue. FrancisDane ( talk) 14:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
the article states that "Moskal also charged that Emanuel had dual citizenship with Israel and had served in the Israeli Army.[35] Emanuel did not serve in the Israeli army, but was a civilian volunteer assisting the Israel Defense Forces for a short time during the 1991 Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases with Sar-El."
so the article addresses the idf claim, but it doesn't address the veracity of the claim that he has dual citizenship - us and israeli. are there any reliable source as to whether or not he ever attained israeli citizenship? i've heard it alleged many times, but don't know if it's true,and the article doesn't answer the question :-/
to be clear, the question isn't whether or not he has us citizenship, but whether or not he *also* has israeli citizenship. 84.138.193.138 ( talk) 22:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
See above. Ilya123 ( talk) 06:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
If his father was born in Jerusalem, he was entitled to claim dual citizenship when he was 18. It appears that he did not choose to do so. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Are people seriously unconvinced of the Massa and Emanuel encounter that is rampant on the news and internet? LaRouxEMP ( talk) 19:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Yeah Mark, because it's still a rumor when the Washington Post does multiple reports on it. LaRouxEMP ( talk) 21:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
So what that it is "brouhaha" as you address it? Do the visitors of Wikipedia not deserve to acknowledge the allegations against the current White House Chief of Staff? LaRouxEMP ( talk) 11:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
"Yeah Mark, because it's still a rumor when the Washington Post does multiple reports on it. LaRouxEMP (talk) 21:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)" if this is so re multiple reports, include in article!-- Xris0 ( talk) 06:10, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
I have added that on the occasion of the Bar-Mitzvah of his son, both Rahm Emanuel and his son visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem. I gave the link to an article in The Jerusalem Post. Now, an individual, repeatedly erases this information, with one particular comment, if Rahm had spent $50,000. on the occasion, that would be news... One has to understand that there are currently talks about peace in the Middle East. Rahm Emmanuel is involved in the process. Nevertheless, he took time off to go on a private visit to Jerusalem to celebrate the Bar-Mitzvah of his son. He could have done the celebration in the U.S. He decided to do it in Jerusalem. This is certainly worth adding. ( Highland14 ( talk) 20:12, 31 May 2010 (UTC))
I deleted
because mercy and lofty (rahamim and rahm) are from totally different roots in Hebrew. Benqish ( talk) 06:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
I really would like the dual citizenship thing figured out. I know he's been accused of it and I've done a bit of searching and a story that seems to be getting passed around the news is that he had dual citizenship but relinquished it when he turned 18. But, just because the news passes this around doesn't mean it's legit. Anyone know anything about this?-- Louiedog ( talk) 14:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
He's not a dual citizen. MarkBernstein ( talk) 14:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
It seems to be missing a few important controversies while putting in silly ones. I'll put it on my long list of things to do, but just wanted to make that note. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 15:49, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
You are very current in the first paragraph: former, but need to follow through in the third: current. I did not read the whole article so there may be other similar.
Rahm Israel Emanuel[1] (pronounced /ˈrɑːm/; born November 29, 1959) is an American politician and former White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama. He served previously as senior advisor to President Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998 and as a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives, representing Illinois's 5th congressional district, from 2003 until his resignation in 2009 to take up his position in the Obama Administration.
Emanuel was chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the 2006 mid-term elections and remained a top strategist for House Democrats during the 2008 cycle. After Democrats regained control of the House in 2006, Emanuel was elected chairman of the Democratic Caucus. This made him the fourth-ranking House Democrat, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn.[2]
Two days after Obama's election victory, he was announced as Barack Obama's designate for White House Chief of Staff.[3] Emanuel resigned from the House on January 2, 2009[4] and began his current job on January 20, 2009, the day of Obama's inauguration.[3] 72.248.203.99 ( talk) 13:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
As with Wikipedia's standards on including controversies sections, one needs to be added to make this a fair article. Research should be conducted in order to "dig up" any piece of controversy you can find, just like is done on virtually any other biography. My research so far has found his quote "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste; they are opportunities to do big things." ↑ http://biggovernment.com/tfitton/2010/10/14/is-scandal-ridden-rahmbo-chicagos-next-mayor/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.146.207.98 ( talk) 18:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I disagree, Mr. Bernstein. I primarily know of this individual as a controversial figure in the Democratic party, and assume that is true for many others. I came to this article to find out what the controversy was about and why he is so particularly disliked by conservatives. Reading his entire, very lengthy article is not an efficient way to do that. You are so active on this talk page (and without even looking, surely the edit history) I'm sure his entire article reads exactly the way YOU want it to read. It would be interesting to know where your political alliances lie. Single or small groups of individuals aggressively dominating the discussion of an article and its edits is a major problem on Wikipedia, this article is a clear example of why. 173.68.18.98 ( talk) 17:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Fat and Happy, concerning this revert [3] and whether or not RE is a Chicago political insider (which he is, and that's not exactly a crime), would you characterize the similar claim that Gery Chico is a Chicago political insider in the lead of his article worthy of reverting too? Or is that also an "unsourced characterization of undemonstrated (sic) relevance"? Dr. Dan ( talk) 01:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I understand that he served as a presidential appointee on Freddie Mac's board for 14 months. That's a fact. [Maybe someone should also point out that the board met only 6 times a year and that Rahm supposedly did nothing while he was on the board, earning about $50K for each board meeting, which by the way are often done by teleconference.] What I find incredible is how he could leave Freddie Mac to run for congress and then, as per the article, be appointed to a congressional subcommittee overseeing Freddie and Fannie. In order to avoid a conflict he would have to recuse himself from every meeting of the subcommittee. Something doesn't make sense here. FrancisDane ( talk) 13:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
According to the source cited in the article ( [4]):
Members of Chicago's Jewish community say Emanuel's wife Amy, who converted to Judaism around the same time as her wedding, is heavily involved with the Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School in Lakeview, Ill.
The couple send their 6-year-old son, Zacharias, and 3-year-old Ilana to the Conservative Jewish day school, which Emanuel himself attended as a child.
So if we're going according to that source, BZAEDS is Conservative. However, their own site says:
The Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School and Anshe Emet Synagogue are separate institutions each governed by an independent board of trustees. The school and synagogue share physical facilities and they value a synergistic, collaborative learning relationship that includes the celebration of life cycle events and holidays.
That's a close affiliation by any standard. So please stop removing it. - Lisa ( talk - contribs) 13:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
This article says Emanuel is Chicago's 55th mayor. The chronology of mayors on the Chicago Public library site says he is 46th. There is one acting mayor they do not include in the official count. The chronology is here: http://www.chipublib.org/cplbooksmovies/cplarchive/mayors/mayorlist.php
129.105.175.116 ( talk) 21:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC) Steve Duke
A question regarding this sentence : "Emanuel's personal involvement in health care reform was made public when it was reported that he had used overtly assertive and potentially threatening tactics towards Democrats who did not toe the party line while in the shower at the House gym"
Is it fair to say he did this toward "Democrats"?, the only story I can recall when this occured was involving Eric Massa who referenced this in a few interviews but should this description be fair to say "Democrats" instead of "Massa"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasow187 ( talk • contribs) 04:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The source cited claimed that Emanuel did this to "Democrats" but gave no example. Then again, the source was a very politically charged column piece. I have replaced it with a hard news piece with the facts about Massa. It has been reported that if this happened to Massa, it probably didn't happen to someone else, and we should figure out how that could be worded best. TylerRDavis ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC).
Hi, glad to see you've chosen to review the article I've nominated. I'm just wondering what you think should improved if possible for this to be a GA. Sorry if I'm being rude, it's just that most reviewers don't start unless they already have comments. Thanks, Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 05:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. It's getting there, it's close I think. I will try and put in some time. The GA review notes mention 2 weeks which gives us til about 12/19. As far as what else it needs, here's some suggestions for us for this week:
Thanks again. Hugh ( talk) 19:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
This review has been on for nearly two weeks now, and I must reaffirm I believe it should pass. As far as I can tell the only recent edits made by you are just copyedits, nothing major. The only thing not passed in your review is 3b, focusing on the topic without going into unnecessary detail, which it sufficentallly passses. I've gone over this article pleanty of times and I can't see any violations, and I believe now is the time for it to be passed. Thanks for all your work. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 00:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: HughD ( talk · contribs) 04:23, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | A genuinely enjoyable read.
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Lead reads somewhat dry, offices and dates, no sense of the person, could be expanded. Consider bumping the "Political positions" section (I'm not a big fan of such sections, preferring to let the facts speak) into the preceding congressman section, when the subject had a voting record and the positions were verifiable. As mayor issues such as his approach toward unions, privatisation of public jobs, lack of transparency, and others are not universally associated with "generally liberal" positions. No lists; nice table of election results; the voter turnout was not 100%. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Some redirects in urls in refs. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Good in-line citation style without being obtrusive, except for maybe the same ref 3x in a row in the Clinton campaign graph, probably once at the end is enough. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Good coverage of a diverse career. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | The Youth service section seems like it is mostly about Obama's program. Consider expanding the mayoralty section. Consider adding a link to the transition plan under "works" and mentioning it under "mayoralty," a pol issuing the criteria by which he is to be judged is notable. Under mayoralty consider adding the Trib's lawsuit over the schedule and other FOIA requests. Consider adding the infrastructure trust and the support of the Council. Consider moving the "popular culture" and "West Wing" sentences to the White House Chief of staff section, where they fit more chronologically. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Perhaps somewhat favorable. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No edit warring or content dispute. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All images tagged with copyright status; no fair use images, mostly federal images. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Consider adding to caption of last image, "Emanuel (left)..." |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | pass |
Based on Rahm Emanuel's story about how his family got their unusual Jewish last name, Mr. Emanuel must be descended from Meir Auerbach who was in the right place at the right time.
Anonymous 71.164.209.8 ( talk) 03:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
It is perhaps worth mentioning that on 27th of September 2007 Rahm Emanuel was awarded the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland, 4th class, by the President of Poland Lech Kaczyński for his services towards the development of Polish-American relationships. He officially accepted his award on May the 3rd 2008. http://expatpol.com/index.php?stsid=32179 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZoodaVex ( talk • contribs) 01:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Isn't "Rahm" a nickname for "Avrahm," which is a form of "Abraham"? 98.110.35.39 ( talk) 14:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)Kurt Hanswurst
Could someone, who knows how to do it properly, please move the 2011 Mayoral Election box down and to the left, beneath the U. S. House of Representatives Election box? The way it's presently formatted makes the display run off the right-hand edge and requiring a scroll to the right. This should also make room for adding the 2015 mayoral election. Thanks. Milkunderwood ( talk) 22:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Its in the article, maybe it needs a photo? Victor Grigas ( talk) 02:16, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Sure. Hugh ( talk) 02:42, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps the most important section, the mayoral tenure, needs updating. Seeking collaborators. Prefer an integrated, topical approach as per WP:Criticism#Integrated_throughout_the_article. Suggest an approach, we keep the "Tenure" subsection around for miscellaneous content that does not yet warrant a subtopic. Looking at the current tenure and criticism sections, see obvious opportunities for subsections on "Transparency," "Police-community relations," "Public education," and others. What do you think? Hugh ( talk) 20:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:36, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
chopper 287 paul u need toback the real deb e and the qiyam we had family on the car crash 3788025 Ezt scabbled the scct cxall alaksa
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rahm Emanuel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the Mayor of Chicago Elections 2011 section where it saids and was sworn in as the 55th mayor of Chicago, 55th should say 44th. 2600:1702:AB0:D890:9F:1131:A74C:3227 ( talk) 07:13, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove "(Acting)" from next to Pete Rouse's name. Pete Rouse is not the acting White House Chief of Staff. 140.233.180.36 ( talk) 22:16, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template.
Alucard 16
❯❯❯ chat?
00:54, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the infobox where it saids office, in the top paragraph where it saids serving as Mayor of Chicago|44th, and under the Mayor of Chicago Elections 2011 section where it saids and was sworn in as the 44th mayor of Chicago, 44th should say 51st because Rahm Emanuel is the 51st mayor of Chicago. 2600:1702:AB0:D890:504:F686:C973:CE6A ( talk) 08:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
For someone who is regularly on the newspapers for being disliked and hated by the African community in Chicago. And facing a steady barrage of “Resign Rahm” protests in 2016. [5] and countless media headlines and even published books about why the people in Chicago gave him such low ratings as a major of Chicago and protesting for many months just for his resignation. It's amazing how none of that is being mentioned in the article. Why is that? There's also so many other stuff on other criticisms like his insensitive remarks towards Hispanics, Asian Americans and how the Black community believe he had no credibility in helping them as a major. But I added merely two things but the article really needs to mention these things about the black community protests against his tenure, and not sweep it under a rug. [6] [7] 49.180.16.205 ( talk) 00:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
3 days ago, the 'Mayor history chapter' talks about 2015 and then jumps to 2019 and completely skips entire years of 2016, 2017 and 2018 without good reason. There's particularly no reason at all to not talk about 2016 in that chapter when media often talked about the public rage against him for his handling of Laquan McDonald shooting video, so I now added that year in. [8] And there were shamefully zero mentions of any black Chicago protests against him as if it's being scrubbed by editors despite the Black community often protests against him in that year. The anger and protests is just so quietly buried deep with a ridiculous amount of irrelevant information and been summarised as public scrutiny in barely a sentence. [9] Editors can't keep constantly removing all that information about his low ratings as Chicago mayor in that year 2016 or the community anger towards him. Discuss in talk and give a valid reason why information about his record low ratings or the protests against him, needs to be reduced from public view? I read the article 2 days ago, and shockingly found it so difficult to notice any information about 2016 or the Chicago Black community protests against him. 49.179.72.173 ( talk) 13:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)