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 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | → | Archive 60 |
The article says, "Trump claimed a loss of $916 million on his 1995 tax returns. As net operating losses from one year can be applied to offset income from future years, this loss allowed him to reduce or eliminate his taxable income during the eighteen-year carry forward period." That was never accurate, since it assumed he never recovered the losses. But we now know he paid $38M in taxes in 2005, so it should be revised. TFD ( talk) 03:11, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I changed it to "could potentially have allowed him to" reduce or eliminate his taxable income. SW3 5DL makes a good point about the alternative minimum tax. Maybe we should remove the whole sentence. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
In October, The Times published three pages of Mr. Trump’s 1995 tax returns, which showed a $916 million deduction that could have allowed him to legally avoid paying federal income taxes for up to 18 years. The forms disclosed on Tuesday do not say whether the $103 million in losses were left over from that 1995 loss.Notice that in 1995, Trump did take the $916 million deduction. It's only the NYTimes making the claim, that he could have spread this out over 18 years, but in the same breath they say, he took the deduction. The $916 million WAS taken in 1995. There is no 18 year carry-forward since he'd already used the entire $916 million deduction to wipe his casino losses. SW3 5DL ( talk) 16:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
This needs to be removed from the article as it is entirely synthetic. Wikipedia is making it appear that Donald Trump spread out his $916 million deduction over 18 years and then it arranges comments by Trump to make it appear he is being dodgy on answering. This is cherry picking to craft a false narrative:
Trump claimed a loss of $916 million on his 1995 tax returns. As
net operating losses from one year can be applied to offset income from future years, this loss allowed him to reduce or eliminate his taxable income during the eighteen-year carry forward period. Trump acknowledged using the deduction but declined to provide details such as the specific years it was applied.When questioned during a presidential debate about such practices, he stated that avoiding paying income tax through such methods "makes me smart."
The key words are, Trump claimed a loss of 916 million on his 1995 tax returns. . .
End of. There is no evidence he spread it out over 18 years. And everything around that first statement is synthetic invention.
SW3 5DL (
talk) 17:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I downloaded the 1995 tax return from he New York Times website and it clearly shows that Trump took the entire amount as a loss in that year. HIs gross adjusted income was (-)$913,765,884. That's negative 913,765,864. There was no carry-over. The NYTimes obviously knows that and tried to make a story out of it by saying, Trump "could" have taken a carry over for the next 18 years, but apparently he did not. SW3 5DL ( talk) 02:43, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Markbassett, IntelligentName, and IP: Here's another thing that should be removed:
An analysis by USA Today, published in June 2016, found that over the previous three decades, Trump and his businesses had been involved in 3,500 legal cases in U.S. federal courts and state courts, an unprecedented number for a U.S. presidential candidate.[132] Of the 3,500 suits, mostly in the casino industry, Trump or one of his companies was the plaintiff in 1,900; defendant in 1,450; and third party, filer of bankruptcy, or other in 150.[132] Trump was named in at least 169 suits in federal court.
I can't see the reason for any of this without the relevant context, and not to mention, this is USA Today, it's not a professor from the Wharton School doing this. And the line, ". . .an unprecedented number for a U.S. presidential canddiate" implies some kind of wrong doing. It also does not define what these suits are all about, they just rattle off numbers. Compared to what or whom? SW3 5DL ( talk) 16:10, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
And none of it is relevant to his BLP. SW3 5DL ( talk) 17:10, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Tiptoethrutheminefield: Yes, perfect analogy. Well said. SW3 5DL ( talk) 17:51, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Here's what the paragraph says now: Trump's legal affairs have been extensive in connection with his business interests. As of 2016, he and his businesses had been involved in 3,500 legal cases in U.S. federal courts and state courts,
In my opinion, this is much better. We should include some summary of
Legal affairs of Donald Trump. Is this summary okay? I think so.
Anythingyouwant (
talk) 18:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
mostly about half involving the casino industry. Trump or one of his companies was the plaintiff in 1,900 and defendant in 1,450.[135] Where there was a clear resolution, Trump won 451 times, and lost 38.
According to USA Today, Trump is the plaintiff in 1900 cases he brought against gamblers for financial problems he's had with them. Probably failing to pay. The edits here are deceptive since no where does it mention Trump is the plaintiff. It gives the impression that he's been the subject of 3500 lawsuits. He has not. Other lawsuits where he's the defendant have been against the hotels/casinos for personal injury. It needs to be specific. SW3 5DL ( talk) 19:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I was still looking at the first part of the sentence you proposed. The whole thing needs to be rewritten. I'll read over the USA article again and come up with suggestons. SW3 5DL ( talk) 20:17, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
This edit removed material with the edit summary "c/e redundant". This strikes me as a highly disruptive edit, because the material was not redundant. Here is what was removed (footnotes omitted):
“ | Trump attended the
Kew-Forest School |
” |
Anythingyouwant ( talk) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
It is redundant. Mary Anne Trump is mentioned in the early life section. Her link takes you to the main article that discusses her. This is Trump's article, not his sisters. HIs sons are already linked and their names link to their articles which talk about them running the family business. It does not need to be here. We do not need tabloid hyperbole for "star-studded," and Jared Kushner is already mentioned in the 'religion' section with his name linked to his article. I'll mention in that section that Kushner works in the White House, but the rest has to go. But more importantly, the inappropriate response by Anythingyouwant, and your comments, are very disturbing and disruptive to this page. And your revert is also disruptive. SW3 5DL ( talk) 04:50, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The second or third opening paragraph states something like "Most of Trump's statements are false or controversial". This is an obvious POV edit and needs to be removed. It degrades practically the entire page and stamps a big biased label on President Trump's statements and does not infer what or any statements he made are false. Further this does not belong in the opening paragraphs of the article. Joshualeverburg1 ( talk) 07:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC) Joshualeverburg1 ( talk) 07:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Anythingyouwant can come by and remove something and I can't re-add it according to the sanctions? I have other things to do and I cannot engage in an argument here. His edit summary was:
"remove paragraph because Trump has not had any formal role in Trump Entertainment Resorts since 2011 or earlier. See http://www.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970203579804576285341283000706"
That Barrons source dated 2011 says Trump reduced his stake at the bankruptcy from 24% to 5% and that he had no formal role. He owned "less than $3 million" dollars of the casino and his name was on it. In what world is a $3 million dollar stake not significant?
Also, another sentence not supported by Anythingyouwant's source was removed at the same time. Kindly restore that paragraph. - SusanLesch ( talk) 16:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
This BLP currently says twice that Kushner is serving as a senior advisor in the White House. It's in the last paragraph of the "Religious views" subsection, and also the last paragraph of the "family" subsection. I plan to remove it from the former, because it has nothing to do with religion. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 17:33, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Dervorguilla and JFG: I disagree. The family section is for Trump's immediate family. The family he created. Not his son-in-law, who is already mentioned in the religion section. The children already have their names linked so info on Jared, who, btw, has his own article and his name is linked in this one in the religion section, which is enough. Also, Anythingyouwant is making multiple edits over the last 48 hours, at a manic rate, some of which should have consensus. The grammar goes wanting as well, in some of the more florid sentences such as, "Later that year, she gave birth to their son Barron, who became fluent in Slovene and English." Was his ability to speak Slovene and English the result of the birth? And what kid born in America to an English speaking family won't learn English? He then runs over to the talk page to get a 'consensus' and if his edits are reverted he seems to have a violent reaction. He flew into a rage the other night when I changed something back in the family section. This seems more disruptive to me. Especially the number of edits. For example, from 16 March at 16:04 to 17 March 03:49, he made 60 edits. A lot of those edits, including his multiple subsequent ones, are poorly written. He's adding junk that will only get taken out when the article finally gets to GA status. In other words, he's making work. And I don't like the photos being moved. Photos being staggered help prevent walls of text. This is disruption, it's not editing. SW3 5DL ( talk) 14:28, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This sentence needs to be removed as it is clearly biased. Looks like it has been written by a leftie and it is biased. Norum 02:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I have no objection to this edit by User:SW3 5DL, except for the footnote. It would be best to have consistent practice in the lead regarding footnotes, and that practice has so far been to omit them. Even where we do include footnotes, a bare URL is unusual. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 03:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I moved the 'ancestry' section to Early life and family. It's a better chronology as it seemed disjointed to be away from his earliest life with his parents. I also looked at other presidential BLPs, namely Barack Obama's and I noted there is no separation of parents and grandparents heritage into an "ancestry" section. I also moved the photos, but you don't really get an accurate preview so it's hard to see if any text will wrap. They should probably go back if anybody is bothered by the text wrapping around them. But farther down the article, all the photos are on the right. That seems a bit much. There needs to be some staggering of photos to break up the text so readers will keep reading. SW3 5DL ( talk) 05:17, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
To be clear, I removed the word 'ancestry' as it now seems pointless, when I moved that section to "Early life and family." It is now combined with Trump's birth and his early childhood life with his parents. Ergo, their background is best there. I don't see the point of the word 'ancestry' but I suppose we could have an RfC if it turns into a big issue. As I said, I've gone over several presidential BLPs, and I don't see any of them giving such weight to 'ancestry.' And when you read through his parents and grandparents background, there's only one mention of the Trump name changing in the 17th century, and I don't see how that justifies a separate ancestry section. In addition, what ancestors did, or did not do, really has no bearing on what a person is doing in their life in the present. So other than a name change from Drumpf to Trump, a separate section for 'ancestry' seems undue. SW3 5DL ( talk) 06:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
This BLP now says:
“ | Trump was born on June 14, 1946 at the Jamaica Hospital Medical Center, Queens, New York City. He was the fourth of five children born to Frederick Christ "Fred" Trump (1905–1999) and Mary Anne Trump (née MacLeod, 1912–2000).[3][4] His siblings are Maryanne (born 1937), Fred Jr. (1938–1981), Elizabeth (born 1942), and Robert (born 1948). Maryanne Trump Barry, is a federal appeals court judge on the Third Circuit. She is now inactive on the bench having given up her staff and chambers, but she is still able to serve on court committess and is eligible to reactivate her status at any time. She was appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton. [5] Trump credits his abstinence of alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs to his brother Fred Jr., who advised him to never smoke or drink. Fred died at the age of 43 from alcohol related illness.
Trump is of paternal German ancestry and maternal Scottish ancestry. His mother and grandparents were born in Europe. His father Fred was born in the Bronx, and became a New York City real estate developer.[6][7] His mother Mary emigrated from her birthplace of Tong, Lewis, Scotland to New York, where she worked as a maid.[8] Fred and Mary met in New York and married in 1936, raising their family in Queens.[8][9] |
” |
This is too much detail about his sister, and misplaced before we describe ancestry. I object to these major reverts of material that has been edited and discussed so recently. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 04:33, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I have reverted the recent reshuffling by SW3 5DL, because the result was hard to comprehend. I'm not against some changes, however they should be discussed here to gain prior consensus. I usually appreciate your work but you've been a bit too bold today… — JFG talk 06:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
What about we include some of the Donald Trump opinion on Germany?
I mean, all the bullshit he is producing about Germany - you can argue that it's the second most hated country after Mexico - shouldn't we include it into the article? (PS! Personal question: is that how you Americans think of us Germans in general, or is it just Donald Elected Trump?)-- Rævhuld ( talk) 18:05, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Not a forum Objective3000 ( talk) 01:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
|
Per WP:Lead, "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents....Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article....make sure the lead correctly reflects the entirety of the article." Does anyone object if we comply with this guideline by making sure that facts stated in the lead are added to the rest of the article if they have not already been added? For example, that Trump grew up at Jamaica Estates? Also, I think the lead is currently incorrect to say that he was born in Jamaica Estates.17:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC) Anythingyouwant ( talk)
Donald Trump was born and raised in Queens, New York City, New York, according to his birth certificate. "Place of Birth: Queens, New York City." Apparently, New York, as do other eastern states, uses the borough systems. Queens is one of the five boroughs of New York. A borough is the lowest administrative level in that state. It was colonized by the English who used the English convention of naming, but later when jurisdictions were being sorted, the borough was lowest level, and everything else became a neighborhood. It no longer followed the English convention of neighborhood, then parish or village, then county, then country. i.e. If you were born in Chapel Row, your birth certificate would say, Chapel Row, Bucklebury, Berhshire, England. But not in New York. So to keep on about the neighborhood is not correct. If anything, it's just a postal zone. Also, he never lived in Jamaica. Nor was he born in Jamaica. Jamaica Hospital Medical Center is actually in the Richmond Hill neighborhood. Trump always lived in Jamaica Estates, from his birth. His parents address on the birth certificate indicates this. He lived in two houses there. The first on 85-15 Warham Road. The larger house, his father built around the corner, also in Jamaica Estates. And more importantly, he always identified as being from Queens, which one would expect from anyone from that area. After that, if someone asked him, "What neighborhood?" He would answer, Jamaica Estates. SW3 5DL ( talk) 03:44, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
FYI those of you who are not aware, there is an ANI thread that my concern you, here. [7] SPECIFICO talk 22:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Regarding the recent edits I have made to the "Ancestry" section, I moved the section on the Trump family's religious background from the "Ancestry" to the "Religious views" section, as per Anythingyouwant's note on my talk page, as it seems the most logical. Anythingyouwant suggested that I should leave his works out altogether; however, I have kept the books that Peale wrote as it helps establish his notability (connections were made in the Washington Post article between Peale's The Art of Living and Trump's The Art of the Deal, but I decided to keep those out as it seemed to be the author's speculation). What does the Wikipedia community think of this? HelgaStick ( talk) 17:58, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Dervorguilla:, I thought the same thing about Norman Vincent Peale. But early today, I researched this and it turns out Norman Vincent Peale had a significant impact on Donald Trump's life. It turns out, Peale's book, The Power of Positive Thinking, had been a huge success when it came out in the 1950s. He was pastor at Marble Collegiate Church and started drawing hundreds of people to his sermons. Donald Trump's parents were among them. Trump said he was instantly taken by Peale's message and said he could have listened to his for hours. Other than his father, Peale is the only other mentor Trump has identified. All through the campaign, it turns out, Trump mentioned Peale many times and often attributed his success to the power of positive thinking. It seems Peale and his philosophy had quite the impact on Trump and it seems this bears mentioning as Trump seems to have internalized this belief like a religion. Peale didn't just talk about positive thinking, his thesis was that when applied to business, or really anything, you find success. I can see, after reading so much about this, where this philosophy would appeal to Trump. I removed mention of his other books because it was really only the Power of Positive Thinking that Trump talked about. SW3 5DL ( talk) 06:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | → | Archive 60 |
The article says, "Trump claimed a loss of $916 million on his 1995 tax returns. As net operating losses from one year can be applied to offset income from future years, this loss allowed him to reduce or eliminate his taxable income during the eighteen-year carry forward period." That was never accurate, since it assumed he never recovered the losses. But we now know he paid $38M in taxes in 2005, so it should be revised. TFD ( talk) 03:11, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I changed it to "could potentially have allowed him to" reduce or eliminate his taxable income. SW3 5DL makes a good point about the alternative minimum tax. Maybe we should remove the whole sentence. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
In October, The Times published three pages of Mr. Trump’s 1995 tax returns, which showed a $916 million deduction that could have allowed him to legally avoid paying federal income taxes for up to 18 years. The forms disclosed on Tuesday do not say whether the $103 million in losses were left over from that 1995 loss.Notice that in 1995, Trump did take the $916 million deduction. It's only the NYTimes making the claim, that he could have spread this out over 18 years, but in the same breath they say, he took the deduction. The $916 million WAS taken in 1995. There is no 18 year carry-forward since he'd already used the entire $916 million deduction to wipe his casino losses. SW3 5DL ( talk) 16:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
This needs to be removed from the article as it is entirely synthetic. Wikipedia is making it appear that Donald Trump spread out his $916 million deduction over 18 years and then it arranges comments by Trump to make it appear he is being dodgy on answering. This is cherry picking to craft a false narrative:
Trump claimed a loss of $916 million on his 1995 tax returns. As
net operating losses from one year can be applied to offset income from future years, this loss allowed him to reduce or eliminate his taxable income during the eighteen-year carry forward period. Trump acknowledged using the deduction but declined to provide details such as the specific years it was applied.When questioned during a presidential debate about such practices, he stated that avoiding paying income tax through such methods "makes me smart."
The key words are, Trump claimed a loss of 916 million on his 1995 tax returns. . .
End of. There is no evidence he spread it out over 18 years. And everything around that first statement is synthetic invention.
SW3 5DL (
talk) 17:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I downloaded the 1995 tax return from he New York Times website and it clearly shows that Trump took the entire amount as a loss in that year. HIs gross adjusted income was (-)$913,765,884. That's negative 913,765,864. There was no carry-over. The NYTimes obviously knows that and tried to make a story out of it by saying, Trump "could" have taken a carry over for the next 18 years, but apparently he did not. SW3 5DL ( talk) 02:43, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Markbassett, IntelligentName, and IP: Here's another thing that should be removed:
An analysis by USA Today, published in June 2016, found that over the previous three decades, Trump and his businesses had been involved in 3,500 legal cases in U.S. federal courts and state courts, an unprecedented number for a U.S. presidential candidate.[132] Of the 3,500 suits, mostly in the casino industry, Trump or one of his companies was the plaintiff in 1,900; defendant in 1,450; and third party, filer of bankruptcy, or other in 150.[132] Trump was named in at least 169 suits in federal court.
I can't see the reason for any of this without the relevant context, and not to mention, this is USA Today, it's not a professor from the Wharton School doing this. And the line, ". . .an unprecedented number for a U.S. presidential canddiate" implies some kind of wrong doing. It also does not define what these suits are all about, they just rattle off numbers. Compared to what or whom? SW3 5DL ( talk) 16:10, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
And none of it is relevant to his BLP. SW3 5DL ( talk) 17:10, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Tiptoethrutheminefield: Yes, perfect analogy. Well said. SW3 5DL ( talk) 17:51, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Here's what the paragraph says now: Trump's legal affairs have been extensive in connection with his business interests. As of 2016, he and his businesses had been involved in 3,500 legal cases in U.S. federal courts and state courts,
In my opinion, this is much better. We should include some summary of
Legal affairs of Donald Trump. Is this summary okay? I think so.
Anythingyouwant (
talk) 18:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
mostly about half involving the casino industry. Trump or one of his companies was the plaintiff in 1,900 and defendant in 1,450.[135] Where there was a clear resolution, Trump won 451 times, and lost 38.
According to USA Today, Trump is the plaintiff in 1900 cases he brought against gamblers for financial problems he's had with them. Probably failing to pay. The edits here are deceptive since no where does it mention Trump is the plaintiff. It gives the impression that he's been the subject of 3500 lawsuits. He has not. Other lawsuits where he's the defendant have been against the hotels/casinos for personal injury. It needs to be specific. SW3 5DL ( talk) 19:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I was still looking at the first part of the sentence you proposed. The whole thing needs to be rewritten. I'll read over the USA article again and come up with suggestons. SW3 5DL ( talk) 20:17, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
This edit removed material with the edit summary "c/e redundant". This strikes me as a highly disruptive edit, because the material was not redundant. Here is what was removed (footnotes omitted):
“ | Trump attended the
Kew-Forest School |
” |
Anythingyouwant ( talk) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
It is redundant. Mary Anne Trump is mentioned in the early life section. Her link takes you to the main article that discusses her. This is Trump's article, not his sisters. HIs sons are already linked and their names link to their articles which talk about them running the family business. It does not need to be here. We do not need tabloid hyperbole for "star-studded," and Jared Kushner is already mentioned in the 'religion' section with his name linked to his article. I'll mention in that section that Kushner works in the White House, but the rest has to go. But more importantly, the inappropriate response by Anythingyouwant, and your comments, are very disturbing and disruptive to this page. And your revert is also disruptive. SW3 5DL ( talk) 04:50, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Donald Trump has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The second or third opening paragraph states something like "Most of Trump's statements are false or controversial". This is an obvious POV edit and needs to be removed. It degrades practically the entire page and stamps a big biased label on President Trump's statements and does not infer what or any statements he made are false. Further this does not belong in the opening paragraphs of the article. Joshualeverburg1 ( talk) 07:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC) Joshualeverburg1 ( talk) 07:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Anythingyouwant can come by and remove something and I can't re-add it according to the sanctions? I have other things to do and I cannot engage in an argument here. His edit summary was:
"remove paragraph because Trump has not had any formal role in Trump Entertainment Resorts since 2011 or earlier. See http://www.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970203579804576285341283000706"
That Barrons source dated 2011 says Trump reduced his stake at the bankruptcy from 24% to 5% and that he had no formal role. He owned "less than $3 million" dollars of the casino and his name was on it. In what world is a $3 million dollar stake not significant?
Also, another sentence not supported by Anythingyouwant's source was removed at the same time. Kindly restore that paragraph. - SusanLesch ( talk) 16:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
This BLP currently says twice that Kushner is serving as a senior advisor in the White House. It's in the last paragraph of the "Religious views" subsection, and also the last paragraph of the "family" subsection. I plan to remove it from the former, because it has nothing to do with religion. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 17:33, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Dervorguilla and JFG: I disagree. The family section is for Trump's immediate family. The family he created. Not his son-in-law, who is already mentioned in the religion section. The children already have their names linked so info on Jared, who, btw, has his own article and his name is linked in this one in the religion section, which is enough. Also, Anythingyouwant is making multiple edits over the last 48 hours, at a manic rate, some of which should have consensus. The grammar goes wanting as well, in some of the more florid sentences such as, "Later that year, she gave birth to their son Barron, who became fluent in Slovene and English." Was his ability to speak Slovene and English the result of the birth? And what kid born in America to an English speaking family won't learn English? He then runs over to the talk page to get a 'consensus' and if his edits are reverted he seems to have a violent reaction. He flew into a rage the other night when I changed something back in the family section. This seems more disruptive to me. Especially the number of edits. For example, from 16 March at 16:04 to 17 March 03:49, he made 60 edits. A lot of those edits, including his multiple subsequent ones, are poorly written. He's adding junk that will only get taken out when the article finally gets to GA status. In other words, he's making work. And I don't like the photos being moved. Photos being staggered help prevent walls of text. This is disruption, it's not editing. SW3 5DL ( talk) 14:28, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This sentence needs to be removed as it is clearly biased. Looks like it has been written by a leftie and it is biased. Norum 02:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I have no objection to this edit by User:SW3 5DL, except for the footnote. It would be best to have consistent practice in the lead regarding footnotes, and that practice has so far been to omit them. Even where we do include footnotes, a bare URL is unusual. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 03:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I moved the 'ancestry' section to Early life and family. It's a better chronology as it seemed disjointed to be away from his earliest life with his parents. I also looked at other presidential BLPs, namely Barack Obama's and I noted there is no separation of parents and grandparents heritage into an "ancestry" section. I also moved the photos, but you don't really get an accurate preview so it's hard to see if any text will wrap. They should probably go back if anybody is bothered by the text wrapping around them. But farther down the article, all the photos are on the right. That seems a bit much. There needs to be some staggering of photos to break up the text so readers will keep reading. SW3 5DL ( talk) 05:17, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
To be clear, I removed the word 'ancestry' as it now seems pointless, when I moved that section to "Early life and family." It is now combined with Trump's birth and his early childhood life with his parents. Ergo, their background is best there. I don't see the point of the word 'ancestry' but I suppose we could have an RfC if it turns into a big issue. As I said, I've gone over several presidential BLPs, and I don't see any of them giving such weight to 'ancestry.' And when you read through his parents and grandparents background, there's only one mention of the Trump name changing in the 17th century, and I don't see how that justifies a separate ancestry section. In addition, what ancestors did, or did not do, really has no bearing on what a person is doing in their life in the present. So other than a name change from Drumpf to Trump, a separate section for 'ancestry' seems undue. SW3 5DL ( talk) 06:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
This BLP now says:
“ | Trump was born on June 14, 1946 at the Jamaica Hospital Medical Center, Queens, New York City. He was the fourth of five children born to Frederick Christ "Fred" Trump (1905–1999) and Mary Anne Trump (née MacLeod, 1912–2000).[3][4] His siblings are Maryanne (born 1937), Fred Jr. (1938–1981), Elizabeth (born 1942), and Robert (born 1948). Maryanne Trump Barry, is a federal appeals court judge on the Third Circuit. She is now inactive on the bench having given up her staff and chambers, but she is still able to serve on court committess and is eligible to reactivate her status at any time. She was appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton. [5] Trump credits his abstinence of alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs to his brother Fred Jr., who advised him to never smoke or drink. Fred died at the age of 43 from alcohol related illness.
Trump is of paternal German ancestry and maternal Scottish ancestry. His mother and grandparents were born in Europe. His father Fred was born in the Bronx, and became a New York City real estate developer.[6][7] His mother Mary emigrated from her birthplace of Tong, Lewis, Scotland to New York, where she worked as a maid.[8] Fred and Mary met in New York and married in 1936, raising their family in Queens.[8][9] |
” |
This is too much detail about his sister, and misplaced before we describe ancestry. I object to these major reverts of material that has been edited and discussed so recently. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 04:33, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I have reverted the recent reshuffling by SW3 5DL, because the result was hard to comprehend. I'm not against some changes, however they should be discussed here to gain prior consensus. I usually appreciate your work but you've been a bit too bold today… — JFG talk 06:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
What about we include some of the Donald Trump opinion on Germany?
I mean, all the bullshit he is producing about Germany - you can argue that it's the second most hated country after Mexico - shouldn't we include it into the article? (PS! Personal question: is that how you Americans think of us Germans in general, or is it just Donald Elected Trump?)-- Rævhuld ( talk) 18:05, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Not a forum Objective3000 ( talk) 01:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
|
Per WP:Lead, "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents....Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article....make sure the lead correctly reflects the entirety of the article." Does anyone object if we comply with this guideline by making sure that facts stated in the lead are added to the rest of the article if they have not already been added? For example, that Trump grew up at Jamaica Estates? Also, I think the lead is currently incorrect to say that he was born in Jamaica Estates.17:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC) Anythingyouwant ( talk)
Donald Trump was born and raised in Queens, New York City, New York, according to his birth certificate. "Place of Birth: Queens, New York City." Apparently, New York, as do other eastern states, uses the borough systems. Queens is one of the five boroughs of New York. A borough is the lowest administrative level in that state. It was colonized by the English who used the English convention of naming, but later when jurisdictions were being sorted, the borough was lowest level, and everything else became a neighborhood. It no longer followed the English convention of neighborhood, then parish or village, then county, then country. i.e. If you were born in Chapel Row, your birth certificate would say, Chapel Row, Bucklebury, Berhshire, England. But not in New York. So to keep on about the neighborhood is not correct. If anything, it's just a postal zone. Also, he never lived in Jamaica. Nor was he born in Jamaica. Jamaica Hospital Medical Center is actually in the Richmond Hill neighborhood. Trump always lived in Jamaica Estates, from his birth. His parents address on the birth certificate indicates this. He lived in two houses there. The first on 85-15 Warham Road. The larger house, his father built around the corner, also in Jamaica Estates. And more importantly, he always identified as being from Queens, which one would expect from anyone from that area. After that, if someone asked him, "What neighborhood?" He would answer, Jamaica Estates. SW3 5DL ( talk) 03:44, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
FYI those of you who are not aware, there is an ANI thread that my concern you, here. [7] SPECIFICO talk 22:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Regarding the recent edits I have made to the "Ancestry" section, I moved the section on the Trump family's religious background from the "Ancestry" to the "Religious views" section, as per Anythingyouwant's note on my talk page, as it seems the most logical. Anythingyouwant suggested that I should leave his works out altogether; however, I have kept the books that Peale wrote as it helps establish his notability (connections were made in the Washington Post article between Peale's The Art of Living and Trump's The Art of the Deal, but I decided to keep those out as it seemed to be the author's speculation). What does the Wikipedia community think of this? HelgaStick ( talk) 17:58, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Dervorguilla:, I thought the same thing about Norman Vincent Peale. But early today, I researched this and it turns out Norman Vincent Peale had a significant impact on Donald Trump's life. It turns out, Peale's book, The Power of Positive Thinking, had been a huge success when it came out in the 1950s. He was pastor at Marble Collegiate Church and started drawing hundreds of people to his sermons. Donald Trump's parents were among them. Trump said he was instantly taken by Peale's message and said he could have listened to his for hours. Other than his father, Peale is the only other mentor Trump has identified. All through the campaign, it turns out, Trump mentioned Peale many times and often attributed his success to the power of positive thinking. It seems Peale and his philosophy had quite the impact on Trump and it seems this bears mentioning as Trump seems to have internalized this belief like a religion. Peale didn't just talk about positive thinking, his thesis was that when applied to business, or really anything, you find success. I can see, after reading so much about this, where this philosophy would appeal to Trump. I removed mention of his other books because it was really only the Power of Positive Thinking that Trump talked about. SW3 5DL ( talk) 06:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC)