Jump to content

Talk:Cabinet of Barack Obama

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

I think it looks better, but WP:HEAD won't allow it. I was curious as to whether it's worth trying to change the policy since they look better or if we should just move ahead and not worry about it. Spinach Monster (talk) 20:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's build it first.  Frank  |  talk  20:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sections

[edit]

We don't need to duplicate the text from the articles. This is about the confirmations; nothing more.  Frank  |  talk  20:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not duplicate, but use as a starting point to expand upon. Spinach Monster (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure looks like the same text from Geithner's article. I don't think we need it in both places.  Frank  |  talk  20:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is for now for the most part, but it's a work in progress.Spinach Monster (talk) 20:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

We need sources for the votes, and we need to check twice. For example, Kirsten Gillibrand replaced Clinton, but she's listed as voting for Clinton to be confirmed, and she's not listed at all for Geithner. Also, with all the text copied from Geithner's article, we need the cites to be cleaned up - if all that text is going to stay. (But I do think it belongs in one place or the other - not both.)  Frank  |  talk  20:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the Gillibrand issue.I'll slap a template on the section for Geithner. Spinach Monster (talk) 21:14, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "WhoWho":

  • From Timothy F. Geithner: "Timothy F. Geithner". Who's Who. Marquis Who's Who. 22 November 2008. pp. K2017000959. Retrieved November 22, 2008.
  • From Susan Rice: "Susan Elizabeth Rice". Who's Who. Marquis Who's Who. 2007. pp. K2014871257. Retrieved May 14, 2008.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved
 –  Frank  |  talk  21:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

[1]. Spinach Monster (talk) 01:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation Floor Votes

[edit]

Why is this section necessary? It's very big and pushes all the text to the bottom of the page, so the reader has to scroll a mile to read anything. It also only includes Geithner and Clinton. If it's going to be included at all, I think it should include at least everyone that's been voted on.. and probably moved to the bottom of the page. I don't support it being here at all, though. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 17:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with it being at the bottom of the page, but the fact that the votes themselves are significant means that it's encyclopedic and helpful to see who voted for who on roll calls. Not sure how voice votes will work. Spinach Monster (talk) 01:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleanup

[edit]

This article is very large, and needs to be either split into smaller articles or shrunk. I know, Spinach Monster, that you're trying to get a GA/FA under your belt, but quantity does not equal quality on Wikipedia. Just because an article has a lot of information doesn't mean that the information is relevant or useful for the topic. An article can be a whole gigabyte large, but grammar, choppiness, and lack of conciseness can ruin it. For one thing, the massive amount of 1-sentence paragraphs in this article is astounding. The TOC should be displayed in every article, regardless of size, but no article should contain this many headings. In order to make this article GA/FA quality, the TOC must be displayed, and must contain fewer headings. Also, going through the GA/FA process will tell you the same thing I'm telling you now.. make this article shorter. You don't have to include every single piece of information imaginable about the subject; that's what wikilinks are for.. and {{seealso}} tags.. WP:Summary Style should be helpful. I'm not trying to shoot down your attempts at making a quality article; I'm just trying to help.. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 16:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, sorry for being defensive before. I've worked hard on this and i'd like to see it reach FA status. Spinach Monster (talk) 02:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see you've attempted to shorten the TOC in recent edits. Nice job, but I have a suggestion. Why not remove the headings containing the names of all the positions that only have one person? Only Commerce and HHS should have name subheadings. Since Hillary Clinton is the only appointed secretary of state, the paragraph(s) in that section will reflect that. Commerce and HHS, however, need the subheadings because there's more than one person. This would almost halve the TOC. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 03:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet. 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.

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet. 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.

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet. 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 or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:President Barack Obama with full cabinet 09-10-09.jpg to appear as POTD soon

[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:President Barack Obama with full cabinet 09-10-09.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 16, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-10-16. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:03, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First Cabinet of Barack Obama
The first cabinet of Barack Obama, photographed in the White House East Room in September 2009. Consisting of the heads of the sixteen United States federal executive departments and seven additional members, the Cabinet of the United States acts as an advisory body to the President. Of the persons shown, five (Gary Locke, Peter R. Orszag, Christina Romer, Rahm Emanuel, and Robert Gates) left the Obama administration before the end of the president's first term.Photograph: Chuck Kennedy
Archive – More featured pictures...

Requested move 15 October 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: MOVED (non-admin closure) Spekkios (talk) 01:05, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmations of Barack Obama's Cabinet → Cabinet of Barack Obama – In line with similar articles for Biden and Trump. Article also covers significantly more than the confirmation process (e.g. tenure). DilatoryRevolution (talk) 16:20, 15 October 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 23:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Seems straightforward. Walrasiad (talk) 23:41, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. The proposed title is an improvement along several of the WP:CRITERIA, particularly concision and consistency. ModernDayTrilobite (talk) 18:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC
  • Uncertain Maybe something wishy-washy like "Members of Barack Obama's [or Donald Trump's or Joseph Biden's] Cabinet" would better indicate what's covered by all three articles. When one talks of Lincoln's cabinet or FDR's cabinets, one is saying something about what they did as a cabinet, or as individual secretaries working together (or against each other). None of these articles talks about the cabinet (what the British, Irish or Canadians also call a Ministry) as such, they just list its members, when (or if) they were confirmed, and when they held office. —— Shakescene (talk) 04:37, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. The closest there is to an article on "Lincoln's cabinet" is the subsection Presidency of Abraham Lincoln#Administration, which is pretty much a straightforward list of officers like here. You'll notice this article just a more detailed spin-off of the same section in the "Presidency of Barack Obama#Administration, so should be similarly simple. The more reflective narratives you're talking about should in the rest of the "Presidency of..." article, not here.
There are also separate articles on British ministries - e.g. Premiership of David Cameron is the reflective article, while Second Cameron ministry is just a list of cabinet officers without narrative. This "Cabinet of..." article should resemble the latter, not the former. Walrasiad (talk) 15:13, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your helpful and enlightening comments, although they led me in a slightly different direction. As you imply, many or most cabinets reflect the President, so discussions of those would be redundant. In the last president's case, in fact, there was no identifiable coherent cabinet to discuss. On the other hand, entire books have been written about or around the cabinet as distinguished from the President, e.g. Washington's (where the interplay between Jefferson, Hamilton and others is quite significant), Lincoln's (Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin) and even George W. Bush's (inter alia, The Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet by James Mann). However, as you point out, this isn't about the Cabinet as an entity but an annotated list of Obama's nominations and appointees. Were we to follow common Sporcle convention and practice, the title would begin "List of..." (e.g. List of mayors of New York City as opposed to Mayor of New York City or List of World Series champions as vs World Series). Plus (1) one should consider the name that's easiest or most likely for an outsider to enter into the Search Box, and (2) this is about unsuccessful nominations as well as those that reached the Cabinet. ¶ In this case, I think the title that would make this article's scope most clearly, accurately, concisely and precisely would be something like Barack Obama's Cabinet nominations. —— Shakescene (talk) 19:44, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cabinets are the executive government, not the president's friends. They head departments. When I want to know who was Sec of Labor or Agriculture or just the entire government under any particular president, I always to go to their cabinet page. I expect to find the information simply and directly. I am sure every cabinet has a wonderful and interesting story, but I am not really looking for their story, just need the facts of who served in what position in that administration. I expect to find the same kind of straightforward dry information in presidential cabinet pages that I find in pages on British ministries, French governments, etc. Walrasiad (talk) 23:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.

Anthony Foxx home state

[edit]

Why is Delaware listed as Foxx's home state, when he's from North Carolina? 201.207.239.205 (talk) 06:21, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 November 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: none moved per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) StAnselm (talk) 05:04, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– WP:CONCISE; also more WP:CONSISTENT with similar articles like Starmer ministry or First May ministry; also more common [2] estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I agree with the above comment about Roosevelt. Including the full name of Donald Trump may not be the most concise, but it takes away any potential for confusion, especially in the event where another Trump family member becomes president someday (or simply someone with the same last name of a past president).
Red0ctober22 (talk) 01:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per @Antony-22; also, to @Red0ctober22‘s point, it would become ambiguous in the event that someone else with the surname Trump, ever becomes President of the United States. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 02:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ambiguity would be dealt with like other cases such as First Rhodri Morgan government versus Eluned Morgan government. As for the second point, that's purely WP:CRYSTAL. estar8806 (talk) ★ 02:53, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Estar8806, what about the Bushes, or Andrew/Lyndon B Johnson? Did you ever think about that? Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 04:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As it stands now they're only redirects, the articles I've nominated are the only ones that have separate articles (to my knowledge). But in those cases, the same thing I said above would apply George W. Bush cabinet, Andrew Johnson cabinet, etc. estar8806 (talk) ★ 04:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still opposed. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 05:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am in agreement with the points above regarding MOS:ENGVAR and the need to follow American convention here. I would also point out that the bulk of the articles pointed out by Nojus R using the X Cabinet/Ministry construction relate to prime ministers (Albanese, Bariner, Scholz etc.) and their cabinet, while some from the Cabinet of X construction appears to relate to presidents (Lula, Petro, Raisi); there is a marginal argument to be made that the difference may reflect that the focus in Cabinet of X is on the centralised figure and their advisers. Pseudoname1 (talk) 17:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per points raised above. 66.99.15.163 (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cabinet_of_Barack_Obama&oldid=1257381782"