![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
User:Tvoz proposed merging Racist attacks on Michelle Obama into this article, but forgot to create a place to discuss it, so I'm doing so. Please comment on this merge proposal below; I have no opinion myself. Robofish ( talk) 17:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Merge: Unfortunately, there is a lot of racism, stupidity, and not-funny political jokes being told. I really don't think that the ones directed at Mrs. Obama are notable enough on their own to require an article. DenaChemistry 03:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
BLP violation - not allowed on talk pages either |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Michelle Obama graduated from law school, passed the bar, worked in a law firm - then relinquished her law license to the Illinois Bar as a condition for sealing the complaints filed against her with that organization. Why does Wikipedia list her law school and law career information with no notation re: the fact she no longer holds a license to practice law? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.109.197.89 ( talk) 21:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp Cheers. 89.247.97.56 ( talk) 00:22, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
The above link is an official State of Illinois website that anyone can access and search the status of persons who are licensed to practice law in Illinois. I think this website might be a bit more reliable for accurate information than Snopes.com. By doing a search on Michelle Obama, you will see that she has been "Involuntarily" retired and not authorized to practice law in the State of Illinois. Furthermore, it goes on to state that she is on "Court Ordered inactive status". Being court-ordered to give up your license to practice law seems like a pretty major item that should be corrected in the wiki article with regards to her career. I sincerely doubt that anyone would ever accuse the Attorney Registration of the Supreme Court of Illinois of being conservatively biased. (DKD) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.97.92.8 ( talk) 02:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
This incorrect and defamatory material is also in violation of our BLP guidelines, which cover talk pages as well as article space, so I am closing this section. Tvoz/ talk 19:16, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
{{
editsemiprotected}}
EDIT REQUEST
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100920/pl_afp/usfrancebookpeopleobamabruni_20100920190212 That too should be included. --
188.23.184.68 (
talk)
09:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
It does seem strange that there are no critical views of her - that are notable. I mean things like expenses scandals or things she has said or bad judgements. This is not a call for racist or right wing chimeras, but as a notable person putting these in context allows a balanced view point. Maybe there are none? I see that there are National Enquirer articles, but as I cannot read them outside of eth US they cannot be seen what they say on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.96.60 ( talk) 07:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Is there enough 'material' for a new section 2016 presidential election ? (under the section '2012 presidential election')
There, i.e. her speech could be mentioned. -- Neun-x ( talk) 13:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
"Early campaigns" section is immediately followed by FLOTUS section, and includes no mention of US Senate campaign. Please change section title to something more appropriate or add a section title above the presidential campaign paragraphs. TIA Sadsaque ( talk) 13:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Should be changed immediately. Does not meet the verifiability criteria for biographies of living persons. Please change DeYoung, Illinois to Chicago, Illinois. According to several sources, like Infoplease [1] and the Cook County Clerk's Office, [2] Michelle Obama was born in Chicago. The New York Times article cited: Dance, Gabriel & Elisabeth Goodridge (October 7, 2009). "The Family Tree of Michelle Obama, the First Lady" [3] does not support the claim that she was born in DeYoung. Furthermore, DeYoung, Illinois did not exist in 1964. Its' name had been changed to Calumet Park in 1925 [4] OrangeInChicago ( talk) 00:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. --
Dane2007
talk
04:50, 23 August 2016 (UTC)References
"Michelle met Barack Obama when they were among the few African Americans at their law firm, Sidley Austin (she has sometimes said only two, although others have pointed out there were others in different departments and she was assigned to mentor him while he was a summer associate" This is the only sentence that talks about the fact that she was Barack's boss. His success is discussed in depth, but this fact is skimmed over. Blh4rf ( talk) 21:17, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Can we link her father's name to this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:801:4100:8575:8D29:1455:4653:EAB5 ( talk) 04:07, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
I think that section needs a little bit more meat. Her speech in NH on Trump's behavior in particular. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.59.152.99 ( talk) 14:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
"As First Lady, Obama has become a fashion icon, and a cool person! a role model for women, and an advocate for poverty awareness, nutrition, physical activity, and healthy eating"
Is it accurate to portray Obama as a fashion icon before portraying her as a role model or an advocate? Does this not play into all the sexist stereotypes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.13.171 ( talk) 14:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
___________
Agree with the sentiment of the post above! Listing "fashion icon" first is somewhat degrading to her accomplishments. The sentence should read, "As First Lady, Obama has become a role model for women; an advocate for poverty awareness, nutrition, physical activity, and healthy eating; as well as a a fashion icon." [2][3] 2601:602:9C03:2300:61DE:7E65:D0CD:A44D ( talk) 01:38, 10 November 2016 (UTC)11/9/2016; sf
![]() | This
edit request to
Michelle Obama has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Flip around these two statements " become a fashion icon, a role model for women". She is a role model for women first!!!! Stevedog494 ( talk) 17:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. --
Dane2007
talk
01:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Michelle Obama has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Education and early career She was inspired - Poor grammar. A new paragraph/topic should use "Michelle" to begin the statement, not "she"
The mother of a white roommate reportedly unsuccessfully tried to get her daughter moved because of Michelle's race. - This should be removed if there is no supporting documents / references
Of the 400 she sent her survey to, only a small number, fewer than 90, responded and her findings did not support her - Fragmented - "Of the 400 who she sent the survey to, less than 90 responded, and her findings ..."
71.236.238.225 ( talk) 22:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Michelle Obama. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I have set the minthreadsleft parameter to 4, so the talk page doesn't get completely harvested. MB298 ( talk) 00:47, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
When will this be fixed? Frevangelion ( talk) 22:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Surely the last sentence of the introductory paragraph is opinion rather than fact. Did she write it herself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.100.206 ( talk) 19:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
The link to the relevant page about Michelle Obama in the White House website has changed to: https://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/first-ladies/michelleobama The old page (which the current link in the article refers to) is still available at the Archived site: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/first-lady-michelle-obama — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snufkinit ( talk • contribs) 13:14, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michelle Obama. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.letsmove.gov/white-house-task-force-childhood-obesity-report-presidentWhen 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) 11:49, 10 June 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.
Hi all who have participated in this discussion. I was reading up on WP:MERGE and 30 days or less is generally the time frame for discussion. Admins are not needed to decide on merge cases. This article merger was proposed in April, so overdue for a decision. The discussion space suggests there's no consensus to merge, and, in fact many contributors would like to keep the article, per WP:GNG. It makes sense that the outcome of this discussion is keep it the way it was. In recalling that notability is not based on the state of sourcing in an article but on the existence of sources available, I'm going to be WP:BOLD and remove the template proposing the merge. Not changing the article as it stands ensures the positive value of stubs and starter articles continues: they are an opportunity for others to improve the encyclopedia, and by existing, are a gateway for people to discover information. This, I believe, is maintaining the spirit of the encyclopedia, which is to freely expand access to information. Shameran81 ( talk) 00:59, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
(Longer dialogue in response to an Oppose !vote moved from #Survey section above)
From whatever source originated the "First Granny" reference (in this case, a source pretty indisputably right wing in its ideology, where the objectivity of its content is often difficult to discern), it still smacks of dismissiveness, and I am no less convinced that it was intentionally inserted into commentary on this issue in this forum for precisely the reason I articulated. BEFORE Ms.Doud's Wikipedia page was either modified or removed (nice move, Wikipedia.), it made NO REFERENCE to either of those instances that you deem to be noteworthy...None. (Besides, I hardly believe that the Daughters of the American Revolution would have warmed to the prospect of Ms. Robinson's activism within their organization.) No - Ms. Doud's page (had been) exclusively devoted to remarking about her being the mother of Mamie Eisenhower and the mother-in-law of Dwight Eisenhower. About her relationship to relatives, both high profile and obscure. THAT'S IT.
It's pretty clear that there is an 800 pound gorilla lurking in the shadows of this discussion that no one seems willing to acknowledge. In my experience, that is a pretty typical tactic employed by those who desire to engage in a particular endeavor, being mindful of having care not to leave a "smoking gun" that can be identified as evidence of such activities. In the past, I have frequently perused the profiles archived on Wikipedia...never once, before, have I encountered an occasion where the merits of inclusion of a particular profile has been challenged...no matter how dubious the merits of one profile or another (or NUMEROUS) might be. DON'T MAKE ME EXTRACT AND CITE PROFILE AFTER PROFILE THAT SUPPORTS MY THEORY ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON, HERE. I find it offensive that this "discussion" has been allowed to remain open for what I view to be a insultingly extended period (particularly given that its existence is pretty conspicuously - AND PROMINENTLY - noted on Ms. Obama's page...or would someone suggest that Ms Obama's profile, likewise, might warrant re-vetting insofar as determining its worthiness to be included on Wikipedia (a forum of which I am increasingly losing what little respect I once may have had regarding its legitimate contribution to scrupulous and unbiased information archiving.)
I will grant this - the "inherited notoriety" argument seems at last to have been recognized as unsupportable as circumstances heretofore prevailed. However, it seems that SUDDENLY raising other arguments, where the unsupportable "inherited notoriety" challenge was clearly perceived to be a winning strategy - until it was called for the foul that it was - is rendered moot...why were NO OTHER arguments previously raised? It strikes me that Wikipedia, by virtue of leaving this topic open for an inappropriate time,by citing that the issue was being raised not merely via Ms. Robinson's profile, but noted via the profile of Ms. Obama (which serves to implicitly diminish the merit of even the profile of Ms. Obama) is signalling a bias regarding the resolution of this "challenge." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:80dd:2720:b4e1:4287:87a5:e44c ( talk) 11:19, 21 August 2017
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Michelle Obama. 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) 05:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Michelle Obama 2013 official portrait.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 17, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-01-17. 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) 02:26, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michelle Obama. 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) 05:34, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michelle Obama. 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) 00:05, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Michelle Obama has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to edit so I can make books and learn how to do my editing skills better. 2600:1702:12F0:E3F0:2D51:EDF1:AF5E:7AE4 ( talk) 00:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
In the section Subsequent activities, please update the forward-looking ref to MB’s memoir being published, perhaps as follows:
In her new memoir Becoming (published November 2018 [2])), Michelle Obama chronicled the life experiences that have shaped her. In the UK the book was serialised for BBC Radio 4 with the author reading it herself. [3]
217.155.200.241 ( talk) 12:40, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
I am 3 years older than Mrs Obama, and my peers attended Whitney Young with a younger Michelle. But Whitney Young HS is NOT Chicago's first Magnet (public) High School. Chicago Public High School for Metropolitan Studies (aka at Metro HS) operated from 1970 to 1991. Google it. It pre-dates WYHS and for many years was the leading Public HS (not in white neighborhoods, with a diverse/non white majority) that had high graduation rates, low dropout rates and who had a high percentage of its students who went on to college. By all measures, Metro HS was a very successful public Magnet HS in Chicago. Whitney Young opened in 1975, and I was ALREADY enrolled in Metro High School in 1975-- where Metro had already been operational 5 years. I do not know if Metro was the first public Magnet HS in Chicago, but it was a very successful public school its first 15 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:240:CF00:5803:D3:67EF:2045:1AD2 ( talk) 22:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
I would say that since she has been disbarred, she is not a lawyer. I wasn't in the mood to read the entire article, but when I briefly skimmed it I did not even see any mention of the disbarment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:D708:ADE6:0:18:8041:8201 ( talk) 15:27, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Under Domestic Travels: "Reese reacted by releasing a public statement that he was honored the First Lady" - should be 'she', Reese is female — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.12.190 ( talk) 12:52, November 16, 2018 (UTC)
I added potential text for Michelle Obama article to Talk page last November 2018 and it has been ignored, not even rejected. Thought her visit to London and associated activities relevant to the UK readershp of Wikipedia. Link to this seems to go to another Talk page – https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Michelle_Obama&diff=870240782&oldid=869208898 217.155.200.241 ( talk) 10:55, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
How does Wikipedia refer to a person in her own main article?
While reading this Wikipedia article about Michelle Obama, I noticed that she is briefly referred to by the last name Obama, but in some other parts this same article refers to Michelle Obama by her maiden name Robinson. I see 2 problems here: First, Michelle Robinson became Michelle Obama when she married Barrack Obama, so the change of the name Michelle is referred by seems to be perfectly logic, but this could cause confusion. At some point, I saw a referral to Robinson after Michelle had already married Barrack Obama and that is definitely wrong.
Second, simply referring to Michelle by her last name Obama creates confusion with the former president, whereas the former first lady is a person in her own right, who (at least I believe so) deserves to be respected for serving the American people in her own way. Usually, when I see a problem in Wikipedia, I try to repair it, but this article is locked. Even if it were not locked, my time is scarce, the task seems to be too big for me and there might be rules on Wikipedia about biographies that I am not aware of.
Volunteers? Anyone? Have fun fixing this bug on Wikipedia! ;-)
PS: Please don't assume I will read your message when you answer me here. I have had some bad experiences, where long and hard work, done in good faith, got me into edit wars with Wikipedia's dinosaurs who would assume vandalism, just because I refuse to log in before editing.
82.173.160.29 ( talk) 23:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC) anonymous 23:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Michelle Obama has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change Jill Biden to Joe Biden in one of the images.
Joe Biden is referred to as Jill Biden in one of the images and redirects to Jill Biden's page. Finnegan333 ( talk) 14:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Michelle Obama has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change AB to BA under education after Princeton University. 2601:CD:C100:490:C4BA:ADE:4190:3D10 ( talk) 02:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello all!
I just recently read an article by
The Hill saying that "
Michelle Obama named most admired woman for third straight year: poll."
[4] So, I was wondering which section should I put it down? I was debating on either
Subseuqent activties or
Public Image and Style. Which one do you guys think would fit best under? Thanks,
Jack Reynolds(
talk to me!)
20:55, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Jack Reynolds(
talk to me!)
21:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Jack Reynolds(
talk to me!)
21:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Michelle Obama transgender conspiracy theory Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 10:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Michelle Obama has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Michelle LaVaughn Obama (née Robinson; born January 17, 1964) is the President of Princeton University, an American attorney, and author who was the first lady of the United States from 2009 to 2017. 2601:2C3:680:3310:5C84:3AB9:E708:4ACC ( talk) 04:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)