Talk:James Madison

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 James Madison was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: May 29, 2007

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the James Madison article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.7
 This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
Archive
Archives
  • Archive 1 - covering discussions from 2006 to January 2007, including discussions of Madison's party affiliation and his religious views


Contents

[edit] Not enough on early life?

There is not enough info weaved into the text about where Madison was born (Port Conway, Virginia was provided in the right column table). There is little about family and early life. There should be more such biographical info early in this article.

J. Cheah —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.111.220.67 (talk) 06:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] James Madison did not graduate from William and Mary, as indicated in the "other facts" section of the article

James Madison, unlike Jefferson and other elite Virginians, graduated from the College of New Jersey (which is today called Princeton University). At the time Princeton was a hotbed of the Scottish Enlightenment and Madison was exposed to ideas from Hutcheson, Hume, and Adam Smith that had a tremendous impact on his political thinking. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sshelby76 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC). What about his language and his religion ?????? This is a Bad Article!@#$%^&*() —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stawberrybanana65 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original Amendments proposed by Madison

I just wanted to write to mention while reading my Constitutional Law book it mentioned in the first Congress James Madison drafted 16 amendments for the Bill of Rights of which 12 where ratified by Congress and 10 by the States. In the article it says that Madison drafted only 12. The author does not give a cite but here is the cite to the book Chemerinsky, Erwin "Constitutional Law Second Edition" by Aspen Publishers New York New York pg. 446. Sorry about my cites not sure of the proper way to lay it out. Anyway I thought that this might spark some research from someone much more qualified than I.

Cheers

NGC —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.222.244.5 (talk) 03:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Graduate of William and Mary

I do not believe that Madison was a graduate of William and Mary, as the article claims. I don't think he even attended it, although I am less sure of this. He was considering going to William and Mary, but was unhappy with the Anglican establishment, and went to Princeton instead, studying under John Witherspoon. See "Chronology of James Madison, 1751-1783," Madison's Works, Vol. 1 (G.P. Putnam's Sons: New York, 1900), xxxvii. Nmille01

i did not know he was a president

209.244.187.140 00:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA fail

I am failing this article for several reasons:

  • The article is not well-sourced. There are many statements that still require citation and these, as well as the citations currently in the article, should come from scholarly research on Madison. There is much available.
  • The article does not meet the "broad coverage" criteria. Large sections of Madison's early life are missing. Since this is a biography page, we need to know about his birth, childhood and education as well as his accomplishments in later life.
  • The article needs to be structured better. The sections on the Constitution, for example, are small and vague compared to the section on his Presidency. This gives an undue weight to his Presidency. I would suggest a thorough rethinking of the structure - what is going to be a section, subsection, etc. and what needs to be covered in each. More research would probably aid the editors in these decisions. Awadewit Talk 08:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slavery, anyone?

Is it possible to call this biography complete without any mention whatsoever that Master Madison was an owner of a stable enslaved African population? He owned on average 100 black human beings who tended to his plantation and household while the Father of the Constitution busied himself with advancing the rights of white propertied folk. While he "thought" about freeing his slaves, like the rest of his contemporaries, great ideas so rarely translated into great deeds. Fact is, this man depended on slave labor for his existence and prosperity. Even the home sight for Montpelier mentions these crucial facts (http://www.montpelier.org/history/enslaved_community.cfm), so why not Wikipedia? Perhaps a deliberate case of "White" washing American history yet again? Shame. (122.26.128.126 05:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC))

Do you have material that you would like to provide? Be bold. ComplexEndeavors 17:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm completely able to believe that Madison owned slaves, but it was kind of the norm back then for the rich white property owners, so I don't think it's of any importance to his individual biography. I'm also fairly sure it was Thomas Jefferson who made a big deal out of slavery being wrong but continued to own slaves his entire life, so his article might be the better place to put this information. (by the way, where exactly does it say he was the father of the constitution? I've never heard that before...)

[edit] Religion??

Under Deism, Madison is listed as a Deist yet under this article he is listed an Episcopalian. What gives? I know he was well known for his Deist beliefs. Imagine1984 18:05, 30 July 2007 (UTC)imagine1984

[edit] Redirect

Just so everyone knows, Madison does not redirect here, despite what it says at the top of the article. 138.69.160.1 21:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I have removed that template, thanks. —Krellis (Talk) 21:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious

Someone needs to rewrite the War of 1812 heading - "British insults" "hostile indians" "american's didn't really want canada" - come on, lets see some neutral and TRUTHFUL info. Sure the British were impressing "American" subjects into the Royal Navy and the NATIVE AMERICANS were at times hostile but the Americans weren't saints. To be honest the War of 1812 was one of the biggest disasters America has faced - their invasion of Canada bloodily repulsed, Native Americans supported by the British and Canadians, A British Army torching Washington DC (in retaliation for the torching of York during the winter season) and ending up marching at will around central america doing what they wanted until a peace treaty was signed. American prestige was only "restored" after a meaningless battle in New Orelans AFTER THE WAR ENDED. Regardless of what people say, this war did not prove Young America could hold their own against the old world, it showed they bit off more than they could chew in attempting to subjugate and forcibly liberate Canada against the populace's will. Don't forget half the canadian population were loyalists during the American revolution and Britain was fighting the might of Napoleon in Europe, so the War of 1812 was something of a sideline campaign. I may have rattled on a bit here butI think it just goes to show that that section needs rewriting to seem something other than some super-american-patriotic propaganda machine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.246.144 (talk) 22:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More on Madison's Notes

While Madison's vital role in the Convention is addressed, I feel not enough attention is given to his role as the primary (although unofficial) note-taker of the Convention. It is mentioned later on, in the section disscussing his later life, but never brought up in the "Father of the Constitution" section, when his roles as a speaker and in developing the Virginia Plan are mentioned. I feel it deserves mentioning, since Madison's notes are the only way we, looking back, have any idea what occurred during the convention (aside from the final result). As they are our only link to the events of the Convention, extremely thorough, and for the most part unbiased, I believe they deserve much more recognition than they are currently given in this article.

KJHalls11 (talk) 04:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Madison and Rothschilds

Bullshit that he "recognized the need" for a national bank, strong (oppressive) central gov., and standing army after 1812. He was whipped by the Rothschilds so he agreed with them: like a critic beat by Uwe Bowl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.96.53 (talk) 05:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not Helping

im writing a research paper on james madison and i need mor info. christian schools require alot and a 13 yr old like myself will not be able to write a 2 page essay from this no offense to who wrote this but i need more please