Talk:List of United States Presidential names

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on April 28, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] Additions to page

It would seem to me to be particularly important to add to this page any nicknames by which someone might be referred in articles contemporary to his time that would omit his actual name. -- Jmabel 18:15, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Resume Candidate

Kingturtle, et al, I did a search of the L.A. Times historic database from 1985 and came up with Bush described as the resume candidate in articles in 1988 and 1991. And it does seem like he would qualify for that title... jengod 19:06, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

I concur with Jengod, although it is interesting to see that the term has since been applied to many others. Maybe deserves an article of its own, rather than inclusion in this list? -- Jmabel 19:25, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Cool research jengod! nicely done! Lately they've been calling Wesley Clark and John Kerry resume candidates. I don't even know what the term means! What DOES it mean? Kingturtle 19:57, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
It means that if you got the job by submitting your resume, rather than by getting out in front of the voters, this person would be highly qualified. No judgement necessarily implied on electability, etc. Can be favorable ("has experience") or unfavorable ("dull, checked all the boxes, but that's all"), depending on context. -- Jmabel 20:10, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Bushitler, Commander-in-thief

I don't think these should be here. The former, while apparently in some use, is no more germane than Birchers calling Eisenhower "the commie in the White House" or fascists calling Clinton "Head of the Zionist Occupation Government." Do we really want to become a compendium of unexplicated hateful slurs? I'm no fan of the current president (nor, particularly, of either Eisenhower or Clinton!), but this is just trash.

As for "Commander-in-thief", is there any reason to believe that this has been used more to refer to W than to, say, Nixon? It's a generic insult, not a specific to this man.

If someone feels they have a strong counterargument on either point, please post it here, or I will feel free to delete in 48 hours. -- Jmabel 19:25, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Agree about any Hitler-themed nicknames. jengod 19:39, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
Commander-in-thief is legit for GW. That Nixon was called it too does not detract from GW being called it. Tyler and Fillmore were both referred to as "His Accidency." Kingturtle 19:57, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Well, I've removed both. If someone wants to restore "Commander-in-thief", I won't argue, but I propose to hold the line against "Bushitler". Also, is there any evidence for any significant usage of the recently added "Little George"? -- Jmabel 07:46, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
At this time, there are "about 30,700" Google hits for "Commander in Thief" (with the quotes); an inspection of the first 30 hits finds one pointing back to this discussion page, and all the rest referring directly or implicitly to President George W. Bush. Therefore, "Commander in Thief" is a major Bush nickname, far more prevalent than several others on this page. It should be allowed to stay. Anomalocaris 07:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I have personally heard "bushitler" and "bushler" used many times. I recommmend that both be added. Whether it is 'hateful' or not is irrelevant. This page is about presidential nicknames, not restricted to only nice or neutral nicknames. --Vagodin
It is absolutely absurd for you to feel that Commander-in-Thief was created solely for President Bush. It is very disconcerting to see overtly partisan rage overpowering reason. For crying out loud, of course most of the hits on google when you search for the term are going to be on President Bush. People like yourselves write with these taglines in blogs and on webpages. Were such places available in the 70s to be indexed by google? If you still think you're right, you need a long time alone to seriously observe your influences in your life, because they have made you into a puppet.
The issue is not whether it was created solely for President Bush. The issue is whether it is in use currently in reference to him. And it has been shown, by reasonable methods (i.e. Google hits) that it is a current reference. Unless you can provide an alternate reasonable method or criterion that provides a counter-argument to its inclusion, you should just leave it. Your own arguments are arguably partisan. It is also bad form for you to make such comments as the above, and worse for you to do so without signing your posts. I am curious whether you are, e.g., Onward ND, or the individual who has committed the vandalism on the G.W. Bush section alluded to by Anomalocaris, or the same individual who repeatedly vandalizes the King George disambiguation page. Not accusing, just noticing similar behavior. 143.127.3.10 22:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

An anonymous user deleted Commander in Thief, despite the demonstrated widespread use of this nickname for George W. Bush. While this nickname may have been used occasionally for other U.S. presidents, it's been used far more for George W. Bush than all prior U.S. presidents combined. Please stop vandalizing this widely-used nickname for George W. Bush. Anomalocaris 19:36, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

What about George III? I've run across this a few times, but I guess it falls in the same category. Sweetfreek 18:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nickname "the Dutch"

We are looking for which President also had the nickname "the Dutch". Anyone out there have that info?

Wasn't Reagan called "Dutch"? That was the title of a biography of him. No idea where the name came from though. -R. fiend

Absolutely! Straight back to childhood. I'll add it.

[edit] Rooseveltski

Does someone have a citation for "Rooseveltski"? I'm pretty familiar with histories of the era, and have run across many disparaging right-wing references to FDR, but this is a new one to me. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:09, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

I am removing it. i can't find it anywhere, not in any of my books, not in any of the internet. Kingturtle 04:20, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
At the same time, I notice we don't have the main nasty nickname for Roosevelt, "the cripple in the White House". Should we add it? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:39, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
The Chicago Tribune called him that - but I don't know how extensively. It would take a lot of research - unless you've already done it. Can you site sources? Kingturtle 05:47, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
Nope, nothing I can cite, I'm just old enough that I the term was still in the air when I was growing up. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:53, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
Well, we have pejorative nicknames for other presidents on this list - and this should be no exception. i'd just like better confirmation. the internet is no help for this example. Kingturtle 05:58, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wilson

Woodrow Wilson was never nicknamed "Coiner of Weasel Words". Teddy Roosevelt did accuse him of using "weasel words" at one point, see p. 1 of the NY Times on June 1, 1916. There's no evidence that it caught on as a nickname, nor is there evidence of the phrase "Coiner of Weasel Words". We might as well nickname Bush "Pronouncer of Nucular". Rhobite 00:49, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jefferson

Wondering if we should add "the Negro president" for Jefferson, a designation that was rooted on his election being based in the Three-fifths compromise. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:14, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

I don't mean to sound like a troll, but did it have anything to do with Sally Hemings? — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 05:52, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
As far a I know, no. As I said, it had to do with the Three-fifths compromise: he won on the extra electoral votes Southern got because of the slave population. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:03, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] GWB

Does "Mr. Cuckoobananas" for GWB really belong? The claim it was used on the Simpsons. So what? Does it have any currency outside of that? -- Jmabel | Talk 02:00, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of it. But apparently salon can write one article and call President Bush Mr. Shitfucker and people will defend it being on the list.

I believe the term is Commander Cuckoobananas, and yes it does. Fishhead64 22:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Likewise for 'Leaker in Chief' - you follow the cite, and it's not there, you search for it on the cite, and you find that it was floated by one person, and one person though it might stick. Well, it didn't so, it should go, and I am deleting now. If it ever sticks, ever is even quoted by a second source, then I'm all for bringing it back. Otherwise, just not accurate and smacks of partisinship. LAEsquire 09:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)LAEsquire

[edit] Father of the Country

I dispute that "Father of the Country" qualifies as a nickname.

Yes, it is used to refer to George Washington, but no one would use "Father of the Country" interchangeably with "George Washington," which is what the word nickname connotes, even if this meaning is not specifically denoted. "Father of the Country" is merely a phrase which describes George Washington. Chasuk 20:49, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

  • I disagree. Some Americans do use "Father of the Country" interchangeably with "George Wahington". If some American politician speaks of "the Father of our Country" in a speech, it is absolutely unambiguous who they are referring to.--Pharos 01:12, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I concur with Pharos. There may be some other word than nickname (maybe epithet?), but the same could be said of a lot of the entries in the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:34, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

We will have to agree to disagree. I am not passionate enough about this to perform any revisions that would probably be reversed later, but I really do feel that the meaning of nickname being accepted here isn't sufficiently rigorous for an encyclopedic entry. Chasuk 05:38, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reagan

"Rockin' Ronnie" and "Rotten Ronnie" both strike me as to unusual to belong. Does anyone have a decent citation to suggest that they were ever at all widely or prominently used? In absence of such, I think they should be removed. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:04, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

"Rockin' Ronnie" may have in fact been self-styled. See this. I was previously unaware of it. "Rotten Ronnie", appears to be a slur on this, the currency of which I had believed similar to "Slick Willy" for Clinton. However, the latter can't be cited and must be removed, I have no objection.
— FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 10:08, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Judging by the citation you give, presumably not self-styled; I presume the movie was not made with his active consent. No question about the movie title, but I've never heard it before, so I'm not sure the nickname had legs; I'll duck out of this one at this point, since I've said my piece, and leave it to someone else to make the editorial decision. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:21, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Notwithstanding any memorable quotes from Born in East L.A., Ronald Dickhead Reagan is not a valid nickname. Anomalocaris 07:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George Bush (#41)

I don't see how all of George Bush's nicknames could somehow be references to the fact that his son became President eight years later—didn't he have any nicknames contemporary with his term in office? Dyfsunctional 18:20, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

  • He was "Poppy" even during his term. I don't remember any other much-used nicknames for him. The occasional George II or George III, but not as much as his son. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:09, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
  • As you might expect, most of the nicknames people use now are based on the need to distinguish him from his son. However, during his Presidency, detractors did indeed call him "King George" (which I'll add), alluding to his allegedly being out of touch as well as to the two wars fought during his lone term. Bush was neither as fiercely beloved as his predecessor nor as fiercely hated as his successors, thus the relative dearth of nicknames. Calbaer 18:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Bush #41 was known during his presidency as "Wimp." See Newsweek articles from 1988-1992 for evidence of this. The magazine even ran a cover story of Bush during the elections with the headline -- "The Wimp Factor." StudierMalMarburg 21:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
    • As far as I know, just an adjective describing how he came off, not an actual nickname. Do you have a clear citation using "Wimp" as if it were a name? - Jmabel | Talk 19:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Many additions, no citations

[1]. I am familiar with "the Babbit in the White House" for Harding, and Jefferson was certainly the "Sage of Monticello" (how could we hav missd that until now?), but I am not at all sure any of the rest of these were or are at all widespread. (I don't doubt that they were each used at least once, but probably every president has been called dozens if not hundreds of things.) Since some claim to be childhood or pre-fame nicknames, those would particularly beg for citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:26, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I added a couple of references to this article, and unless I'm overlooking something, I see no other previous references or external links to verify some of these nicknames. Some of the nicknames are quite familiar, but in my opinion others if not referenced at least need further explanation on how the President acquired a particular nickname. I think the origin of a nickname is as important as the nickname itself, and if possible, should be explained. --LibraryLion 20:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, in general the article is undercited. The addition of the books you used to the reference section is very welcome; of course, more precise citation (what came from what book, ideally what page) would strengthen this. I'm assuming that what you added was accurate, but if the history of this article is anything to go by, people will be challenging these, and without precise citation there is almost no way anyone can defend your additions unless they have a source of their own. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I have given you references, the only ones on in this article, so how about listing your references? With my sources, I can probably verify at least 80% of the nicknames on this list, so essentially I have made your article accountable from that standpoint if anyone does dispute a nickname. If you want a detailed reference for each nickname, that is fine, but be consistant on your part before questioning what I have added. --LibraryLion 19:24, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
LibraryLion, I've added very few nicknames to this article. (In at least one case, I added a reference for a name I did not add.) I added "Jimmy" for Carter, which I don't think needs a citation, but if you disagree I will certainly provide one. I added "Dutch" Reagan: again, so well known I didn't think it needed a citation, but if you think it needs one I will certainly provide it. If there is anything else I've added about which you have any doubts, please, just indicate what and I will gladly turn up a reference. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:20, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
My apology, I was under the impression you had written nearly all this article. Anything I add will be from the references listed, if not, I will list each source I use. What I believe would add to this article are details on the origins of some of the nicknames. Your average reader will wonder why R.B. Hayes was nicknamed "Rutherfraud", or M. Fillmore called "His Accidency." On the article about the U.S. Presidential List of slogans article, I added a number of slogans while also adding the reasons behind the various slogans. Just an idea to consider for this article. --LibraryLion 22:48, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree completely. I think this would benefit from being slightly more of an article, and slightly less just a list. It would still be useful if you would give page numbers as citations, and (maybe more important) indicate which book is the source of which nickname. I'm guessing that with the username LibraryLion you are familiar with Wikipedia:Cite sources. Most of what I've done in this article is to try to clarify & cite for references, and to defend against the uncited and obscure. If your individual entries don't indicate where they are cited from, I've got no ability to defend them against being removed by someone else, because I certainly won't be able for each entry to remember whether it was added by someone generally reliable. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Currentism"

In a spate of what one Wikipedian (I forget whom) dubbed "currentism", we keep getting minor, non-notable nicknames for the current president, such as one whose only currency is a single episode of the Simpsons. I believe these should not be here. What do others think? -- Jmabel | Talk 07:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Anyone can coin a nickname via a blog. That doesn't make it notable or widespread. The Great Divider links to an article written by a high-school Junior. The Smirking Chimp is the name of a blog that gets some traffic, but I'm not sure the nickname has caught on in the media. Bush Fils and Bush Pere link to the same article in the Nation. There is also a problem with repetition. We need some standards here. --JJay 14:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Funny, these aren't mostly the ones I was objecting to (although I have my doubts about "The Great Divider", and would like to see a decent citation). "The Smirking Chimp" probably has enough currency from the blog of that name, The Nation is actually a rather appropriate source and probably almost anyone would at least immediately know who Bush Fils and Bush Pere meant, but "Commander Cuckoo-Bananas"? "Usurper-in-Chief" attributed to Counterpunch which probably has a circulation in the low four figures? (It would be relevant as a source for a news story, but not as a source for a nickname being common.) "Commander-in-Thief" attributed to the Smirking Chimp blog, and which has probably been used by the enemies of a dozen presidents? -- Jmabel | Talk 06:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
At this time, there are "about 206" Google hits for "Usurper in Chief" (with the quotes) and "about 176" Google hits for "Usurper in Chief" Bush. This is bigger than just Counterpunch, which, anyway, probably attracts a lot more readers to its website than its print edition. Anomalocaris 06:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, fellas. For something to be a nickname, it has to be in common usage -- otherwise it's just an epithet. Most of those listed for Bush fail the familiarity requirement badly and should not be included. -Onward ND 04:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Although you claim to "agree" with the discussion thread, you've gone ahead and deleted nicknames that are either not discussed in the thread (e.g. King George), or that the thread itself acknowledges are probably current usage (e.g. smirking chimp). If google hits are any measure, smirking chimp (nearly 1.4MM hits, excluding Wikipedia and smirkingchimp.com) is perfectly legitimate. What is your basis for your claim that "most of those listed for Bush fail the familiarity requirement"? Please don't base this on subjective familiarity.--68.164.89.52 15:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

This is as good a section as any to discuss the recently vandalized section on George W. Bush and the nicknames I have restored to that section. Wikipedia user-editors should be aware that just because they might not have personal familiarity with a name, that doesn't mean it isn't in widespread use. A presidential nickname in widespread use deserves to be listed on this page, even if it is mean-spirited or not apropos of the true presidential character.

Google can be used as a reasonable indicator of the widespread use of a nickname. Raw numbers alone are not absolute indicators, because, depending on the search, they can underestimate or overestimate the use. For example, In the list below, searching for "The Big Creep" without the word "Clinton" would find plenty of fictional and non-fictional use of the name for individuals other than Clinton, but "The Big Creep" Clinton would omit any use of the term apropos of Clinton in articles that don't mention the word "Clinton." With this caveat, here are Google hit counts observed today designed to measure the widespread use of various recently-vandalized Bush nicknames. Negative nicknames for Bill Clinton and a positive nickname for Ronald Reagan are offered for comparison.

"Baby Bush" George about 30,800
"Bush Fils" about 20,300
"Bush Pere" about 76,500
"Smirking Chimp" about 1,320,000
"The Great Divider" Bush about 21,700
"Resident Bush" about 64,800
"Commander in Thief" Bush about 31,300
"AWOL Bush" about 51,900

"Comeback Kid" Clinton about 87,500
"Slick Willie" Clinton about 97,500
"The Big Creep" Clinton about 637
"Ol' Slick" Clinton about 738
"Rockin' Ronnie" Reagan about 475

Like it or not, names such as "Resident Bush" and "Commander-in-Thief" are widespread nicknames for George W. Bush, and an honest article must include them. Anomalocaris 04:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Not really a fair guage, again apropos of currentism. One would expect more hits for GWB nicknames because there are more items concerning GWB on the internet than ones concerning his predecessors. Fishhead64 22:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it's certainly a fair (in the reasonableness sense) gauge, just not a gauge that is equally applicable across all presidents, since prior to about Clinton, the internet was not really available as a research tool for this sort of searching. If your definition of "fair guage" is that the method of determining "currentness" of a nickname should be uniformly applicable over 200+ years of American presidents, then this will be a uselessly sparse list. One can't say it's "unfair" that more GWB nicknames can be identified because the internet makes them easier to find relative to nicknames for, say, Millard Fillmore. Undoubtedly there were many more nicknames for Millard Fillmore in his own era than are easily recalled today; that doesn't mean that somehow the number of GWB nicknames should be limited because they are too easy to find. I agree that the definitions of "widespread" and "current" are somewhat subjective, but choosing Google hits as some sort of "currentness" benchmark for a current sitting president in 2006 seems eminently reasonable, and fair. --216.70.158.120 18:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I just reverted some deletions that appeared to have been made because the person doing the deleting (JzG) felt that they "needed citations and blogs are not citations." There are a couple of issues raised:

1) It's not clear that blogs or websites can't serve as sources for citations.

2) If new or additional citations are needed, it's fine to request them.

3) Inadequate citations should not automatically qualify an entry for deletion. For entries in this article, currency would seem to be a more relevant metric.

--DeMongo 01:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


This article is full of partisan nonsense. Look how many more nicknames there are for the last 4 presidents compared to the rest of presidents in US History. The majority of the nicknames listed for Bush 41, Bush 43, Clinton, & Reagan are non-notable, obscure crap put in by partisans. It needs to be cleaned up, but it doesn't appear likely to happen any time soon. Comments? Dubc0724 13:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Is it your contention that because there are more nicknames listed for the last 4 presidents that somehow the lists are more partisan than prior eras? As noted above, a greater volume of nicknames for all the presidents of the last quarter century relative to those prior to that period may or may not indicate increased partisanship, but it certainly reflects the improved technology available for disseminating those nicknames, and information in general. I would further argue that any term thought of as a "nickname" is going to be inherently partisan, positively or negatively; whether or not a nickname appears on the list should be determined by its currency rather than its lack of partisanship, as all nicknames will have supporters and detractors. So...what nicknames don't you like and why do they lack currency? DeMongo 03:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
AWOL Bush and Resident Bush

This looks like as good a section as any on this page to protest past removal and defend re-inclusion of AWOL Bush and Resident Bush.

AWOL Bush was removed because it "is sourced to a self-published website." That is not a good reason to remove it. There are 13,600 Google hits for "AWOL Bush" (with the quotes), and the most natural website to select is AWOLBush.com. The link's purpose is not to cite a neutral authority asserting that the term is in common use, but rather to cite a representative use of the nickname.

Resident Bush was removed because "it's sourced to a partisan website thus failing WP:RS." This would be a valid reason to exclude any general alleged factoid about the George W. Bush, but it is not a valid reason to exclude a nickname. Naturally, general-interest sources such as The New York Times typically call public figures by their regular names rather than by the hostile nicknames used by critics. If the Internet had existed in the time of Rutherford B. Hayes, there probably would have been anti-Hayes websites such as hisfraudulency.com, which would then be an ideal reference for the Hayes nickname His Fraudulency. There are 38,400 Google hits for "Resident Bush" (with the quotes), establishing that the term is in common use, and the most natural citation is to ResidentBush.com. Anomalocaris 01:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] other names

Bush II

Bushie Chimpy

Clinton

Big Willie

Ronald Reagan

dickhead

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.241.245.49 (talk • contribs) 8 Nov 2005.

[edit] Some of this is junk..

I'm sorry, this is supposed to be an encyclopedia list of common Presidential nicknames, not a venue for every crank, GW Bush is not commonly called "smirking chimp" (?), the first Bush was not called "Poppy", "Bush the Elder" etc. while in office, also Clinton was not called "Elvis" to any recollection of mine...these need citations and not just partisan cranks, these serve no purpose...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.72.215.225 (talk • contribs) 25 Apr 2006

Many of the names you vandalized were provided with links to references. Additionally, Google hits have been cited above for most of these names to show their legitimacy. Although you may not have familiarity with the names yourself, your own opinion and experience does not constitute a sufficiently objective criteria; thus, your deletion of the names could also constitute "partisan crankery". Also, in the future please sign your comments.216.70.158.120 02:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

"Although you may not have familiarity with the names yourself, your own opinion and experience does not constitute a sufficiently objective criteria", no just random wackos who set up websites should rise to the level of an enyclopedia entry, they have superior opinions and experience that no doubt better reflect mainstream culture; having experienced all 3 Presidents referenced, I was apparently out of touch as are most Americans, why if I say "Elvis" in most parts of my country people think "Bill Clinton" or "Smirking Chimp" (???), they'll think "George Bush"...sorry for thinking this was supposed to be an informational list...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.72.215.225 (talk • contribs) 26 Apr 2006

[edit] Ronald Raygun

He didn't get this nickname as a result of SDI. Jeffrey Shurtleff used it in the spoken intro to Drug Store Truck Drivin' Man at the 1969 Woodstock Festival: "This one is for the governor of California...Ronald Ray-gun - zap!" Fishhead64 22:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

True enough, and we should cite that as a likely origin. But SDI certainly reinforced it as a nickname rather than a stray remark. - Jmabel | Talk 18:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] embedded links

Wikipedia standards try to avoid embedded external links whenever possible. Valid nicknames in this article do not need embedded external links. Kingturtle 02:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

In an effort to avoid a reversion war and be a good wikipedian, I have tried to research your first statement. It's not obvious to this user exactly what is meant by "embedded link" in Wikipedia in general and in your comment specifically. Links to anchor text and links to bracketed numbers both seem to be called embedded links. I have not found an example of a link described as non-embedded. Wikipedia:External_links does not use the word "embedded." However it contains several embedded external links, for example, Interview. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) does discuss embedded external links, but does not say to avoid them. Also, Wikimedia's When should I link externally says "External links are a very good way of pointing to authorative reference material that supports facts in the article."
Would you kindly point to the standards page that does suggest trying to avoid embedded external links whenever possible, and also rigorously defines the term as opposed to non-embedded links.
Also, if it would ordinarily be preferable to have anchor text external links at the end of an article rather than at the point of first use, I question if that ordinary preference applies to this article.
Kingturtle, I applaud your work for Wikipedia, but here, you were careless in several ways. (1) When you removed George Wahabi Bush, you did so incompletely, leaving a fragment about Islamic governments. (2) When you removed embedded links, you removed Incurious George, which had been paired with Uncurious George. According to Google, Incurious George is the more common of the two on the World Wide Web. (3) in the same edit, you paired Uncurious George with The Smirking Chimp, although these nicknames have nothing to do with each other. (4) In this edit, you removed external links from only the section on George W. Bush, leaving others behind elsewhere. If there really is a standard, it should have been applied in a consistent manner throughout the article. (5) in your comment on this edit, you asserted that external links "have no place in wikipedia." This is contradicted by the above Wikimedia quote, and their widespread use in Wikipedia, including Wikipedia's how-to pages. (6) When you reverted a second time, you removed without explanation the nicknames "The Decider" and "Decider-in-Chief".
(Please forgive the use of full-URL links to past revision pages in the preceding paragraph. If there is a way to provide internal-style links to them, kindly direct me to the help page where this is explained.)
One might reasonably argue that if a given presidential nickname is in widespread use, there is no reason to select any particular usage of it as citation-worthy. However, several of the external links were chosen with care. The same article was linked for the natural pair of nicknames Bush père and Bush fils, which I believe is a good idea. Since this article specifically states that The Smirking Chimp is "the name of a well-known anti-Bush web site" it strikes me as pathological to remove the link to that site. The Uncurious George and Incurious George sites list hundreds of citations of these uses, which makes them kind of special resources, better than anything a casual user could generate simply through an internet search. The link you removed for Resident Bush actually linked to an eponymous website, so it's unique, not a random choice. The link you removed for Commander-in-Thief links to a page listing many articles containing this usage, so it's specially selected and not a random choice. So, even if random individual citations are deemed inappropriate for external links, I believe these are special cases and at least some of these nicknames merit their selected links.
If external bracketed numbered links are considered preferable to anchor text links (and I vaguely recall reading somewhere that Wikipedia has the opposite preference) then rather than deleting the anchor text links altogether, they should have been replaced with bracketed numbered links.
Please consider these comments. I will avoid editing this article for at least 24 hours, but after that, if you have edited neither the article nor this talk page, I will judiciously edit the article again.
Respectfully submitted, Anomalocaris 07:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Anomalocaris, basically, all wikipedia pages are laid out with external links at the end or as footnotes, clearly divided from internal links. having embedded external links can confuse the reader, and can move the reader away from wikipedia.
your research is helpful. you're explanation makes sense. rather than create a link within the nickname, you should consider creating a source after the nickname. List of people known as father or mother of something gives an example of sources listed.
I apologize for my botched edits of this article. I only meant to remove "George Wahabi Bush" because it got only 155 google hits. The syntax used to make the chart is clunky and difficult to untangle, so the other ommissions and couplings came when I tried to remove the embedded links. Consider using a syntax like List of Major League Baseball stadiums to help editors find their way more easily.
Lastly, my edits were not intended to be political. I did a quick skim of the article to see if there were other embedded external links, and I must have missed them. Kingturtle 12:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. Please answer the rest of my questions above. In particular, I would appreciate a definition of embedded that contrasts with non-embedded. I still don't know how to determine if a link is embedded or non-embedded, either by your defininition or Wikipedia's.
I believe the purpose of the external link symbol is to inform the user that the link is an external link, and that Wikipedia users understand this and are not surprised to leave Wikipedia when they click an external link. You seem to believe that having users click away from Wikipedia harms Wikipedia in some way. It does not, first because Wikipedia is nonprofit and therefore has nothing to lose (e.g. sales), and second because Wikipedia is intended to be useful, and sometimes the most useful thing is an external link. Furthermore, it's clear from Wikipedia's own how-to pages that it is OK to have external links other than at the end of articles.
Hyperlink includes the external link U.S. Patent 4,873,662 .
Wikipedia:List of really, really, really stupid article ideas that you really, really, really should not create includes the external link Uncyclopedia.
Wikipedia:Deletion policy includes the external links Wiktionary and Meta.
Wikipedia:Your first article includes the external links Library of Congress and material. This example is the most telling. Here, external links in running text is offered as an example of what to do in Wikipedia. That's pretty compelling.
I agree that List of people known as father or mother of something is nicely laid out. But again, I draw a distinction between an external link that provides a mere example of a usage and, for example, the more significant "well-known web site." Even if many links are provided in bracketed number format, Smirking Chimp might well be hyperlinked directly because it is the name of an eponymous website. Anomalocaris 16:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proliferation of George W. Bush nicknames

How commonly used does a nickname have to be to count as a nickname? And how specific does it have to be? For example, perhaps any number of past U.S. presidents were called at one time or another something like Stupid or President Stupid — but there is nothing about these names that links them to any particular president. So, I wonder if President Moron really counts as a valid nickname for George W. Bush. The mere existence of an eponymous website doesn't make it. Many other websites link to the Smirking Chimp site (at this time, about 14,200, according to Google). But only 69 link to the President Moron site. I think President Moron is just not used very much, and should be deleted from this page. Anomalocaris 00:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Before even noticing this comment, I had removed it. - Jmabel | Talk 04:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dumbya

Why has this name been removed from the list? Yes, it's pejorative. Yes, some people may not like it. However, it is one of the most common nicknames that has been used over the years to describe Bush. Even his financial supporters in Texas called him "dumbya" when he was running for governor. I'm not going to get into pissing contest with anyone about putting it back in. I'm just curious why such an obvious nickname is left out. StudierMalMarburg 21:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Possibly. Citations? - Jmabel | Talk 19:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Citations? Do a Google search for "dumbya." You'll get 159,000 hits. There's no problem citing this nickname. StudierMalMarburg 18:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Wow! Such a biased comment. Amazing.--Getaway 19:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I went through the first 60 or so. Mostly blogs and personal web sites. Didn't spot anything we'd normally consider citable. The one thing that looked like a good prospect was a Molly Ivins article in Mother Jones, but she doesn't use the nickname: it must have been in links to the page. - Jmabel | Talk 00:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jackson

I've never heard of Andrew Jackson being called "Sharp Knife". Is there a citation for this? - Jmabel | Talk 06:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Un/Incurious George

I just went through and re-worked all sources given for nicknames to ensure they are cited consistently (and using superscripts with links to the sources at the bottom).

I noticed that "Incurious George" and "Uncurious George" are both sourced to the same website (only the names are different). I don't see how citing one partisan website constitutes a legitimate "nickname". I haven't deleted them, but I'd like to see if we can get some consensus on whether they are truly worthy of inclusion, or if this is just "Wikipoliticking". Dubc0724 19:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I've seen it used a bit—there are even t-shirts of Bush as the monkey—but I agree that there are far too many non-notable nicknames for recent politicians. - Jmabel | Talk 23:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

The Uncurious George or Incurious George website may or may not be partisan, but one thing is for sure, it offers hundreds of citations of Uncurious George and Incurious George used for George W. Bush, even before the election of 2000.

Rather than saying that there are "far too man non-notable nicknames" I believe it would be helpful to suggest specific ones as candidates for deletion. If certain recent U.S. presidents have more nicknames listed than the rest, it may be that the public used more nicknames for them. Anomalocaris 05:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe this page was easier to use with direct external links rather than "ref" style superscript links. I am not going to start a revision war over this, but I believe that this change was regrettable for this page. External sources at the bottom may be useful for more scholarly articles, but for an essentially list-oriented article like this one, I believe it is more user-friendly and also looks better to avoid the extra step of forcing the user to click twice to get to the external web page.

As said here earlier, "it's clear from Wikipedia's own how-to pages that it is OK to have external links other than at the end of articles." Anomalocaris 06:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

The problem with direct external links—and it is enough of a problem to make them nothing but a temporary expedient until someone "fixes" them—is that if the link goes dead, there is pretty much no indication of what it pointed to, and hence (1) they completely cease to function as citations and (2) there is no hope of finding the page if it has moved. - Jmabel | Talk 01:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page organization

This page is a bit hard to read as is. Does an editor more knowledgeable than I know how to separate each nickname with bullets? I think that would make this page much more readable. --Ball&Chain 20:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dubya

This should probably be redirected here, just as Dumbya redirects here. It is protected from editing though. --66.41.102.194 01:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] deletion of this article was proposed without edit summary announcement

An editor proposed this page for deletion without fanfare - discussions are taking place now on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States Presidential names. Clearly the page needs work - citations, cleanup, removal of POV - but a lot of work has gone into this page and contributors might want to add their comments before a decision is made. Tvoz |talk 20:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

And I think there's only a five-day window for comments, so if you have an opinion on the deletion for or against, you might want to weigh in. Tvoz |talk 23:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other names

Somebody feels strongly enough about the nicknames, see above. I disagree with deleting the list, but sources/references need to be provided for all nicknames or they should be removed. Anynobody 04:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Agree -sources are of course a good idea - we should work our way though the list as a few have started to do - but it will take some time. I'd put a "citations needed" tag on top and try to get people to systematically go through the list and add references or remove entries. I added a few earlier today and will continue. But first we'd need to save the article from the guillotine. Tvoz |talk 04:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I deleted everything which wasn't referenced for those who are still alive, and WP:BLP applies to. Some of the deleted info can be sourced, so when it is and put back I won't delete it again. I just couldn't rationalize leaving in an unsourced nickname I knew was right with my saying so as the only proof. Anynobody 06:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clinton

It dawned on me that Bill is a nickname, should it be removed from his heading? I left it in with quotations. Anynobody 07:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Dunno - maybe should be like Carter as JimmyTvoz |talk 07:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Two 'King George' nicknames for Dubya?

I notice that George Bush, Jr., is attributed the nickname, "King George (II)" (indicating that sometimes the 'II' is used and sometimes it is not). But then later in the list, there is a seperate entry for "King George". I did not delete this duplication because it is referred to a different foot-note from the earlier entry and I did not want to wipe out that information. Couldn't these two be combined? Flonto 17:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would think so - I'll take a lookTvoz |talk 18:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd leave it as is, George II is more like a movie sequel title than royalty. Anynobody 22:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

I've noticed that some of the new references are not formatted correctly or not good enough for the standards of WP:BLP. I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad so I'm not going to mention names. To make sure we make a consistent article please format references like these 2 examples:

<ref> The Presidents by Joe Author ISBN 000etc. </ref>

or for online sources, citing an website and not linking to it is not the best way to cite a source:

<ref> [http://www.website.com www.website.com] - Website name/brief description </ref>

As to sites that don't meet WP:BLP, calling Dubya a smirking monkey and citing a partisan website dailykos is not a neutral POV and also is probably not notable. A refernce like the BBC calling him the velcro president is closer to the standards of both WP:N and WP:NPOV. Anynobody 22:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Well - I've been using the {{cite web}} or {{cite news}} formatting, which I believe is consistent with WP:BLP style, as it's what we've been asked to use in FA review on candidate pages that I've worked on. So is there some problem with that format? But - while I definitely agree we ultimately need proper formatting, I think perhaps we should focus first on accumulating the citations, then on getting any that are not posted properly into format. Right now, I'm hoping we can save this article from deletion - incorrect format of refs surely isn't a deletable offense. As for the sources, let me think about that a bit - I am not sure that a source has to be neutral in this case, as they are being used to illustrate what is likely a non-neutral point of view. In other words, nicknames and epithets are by definition often POV, and their sources necessarily so as well, and I don't know that this is something we need to avoid. We are simply reporting examples of how nicknames have been assigned to various individuals. That's one of the reasons I'm trying wherever possible to have more than one citation for these entries. So yes, the BBC is great, and I think I added some from CNN and NPR - but Daily Kos may be fine, for their use of a common epithet assigned to a person they oppose. But I'm not speaking specifically about the cite you mentioned - I have to look closer at that - I'm talking more generally. Tvoz |talk 22:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Appeal from an Ignorant Technophobe

I am managing to provide references for nicknames which I think demonstrate that they are in reasonably widespread use: but as you can see for yourselves, the results are not exactly reader-friendly! Part of the problem is that I am a technological ignoramus - I do not know how to create those superscript numbers that link with references at the bottom of the page. Even if I did, I would still not know how to incorporate them into the existing ones - because all the numbers have to be in order of occurrence, right? So I am giving the references in the main text right after the nicknames, which is a hopelessly untidy way of doing things. I am hoping that some of you guys with superior script skills will be able to change what I have done into the correct format. Another problem is that I have often not been able to identify a single source authoritative enough to stand as verification on its own. That is when I have cited several in order to prove that the nickname has genuine currency. I will be trying to get hold of some actual books that will provide satisfactory single sources for a good few of the names in the list, especially the earlier presidents. But for the moment, some of my additions look a real unreadable mess that would certainly discourage people consulting the article. Can anyone help? Please? Flonto 23:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll help you, I think the best way to show you how the superscript references work would be for you to post an example reference here. I'll format it so you can see how it looks. Anynobody 00:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another Thought

Should we delete all of my clumsy main-text references until the fate of this article has been decided, then (if we escape the chop), restore them one-by-one, properly formatted? People are still voting on our fate and visitors seeing the mess that I have made are not going to be impressed. If you think this is the best policy, take ruthless action. Flonto 23:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a good question, but I think our best bet to save the article is to fix them. Anynobody 00:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Progress

Thanks Anyanybody! I saw how to do it from your examples. I have sourced a good number of names to an educational resource called 'Classroomhelp.com', which seems like a nice solid reference to give. The site got a few nicknames wrong (they even thought John Tyler was 'Young Hickory') but the advantage of citing a source like that is that people can be sure that none of the names from it are inventions. I mean, they wouldn't lie to our children....would they? Flonto 09:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Good deal, thanks Flonto I appreciate your work. Anynobody 00:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Today England - Tomorrow the World!

For some reason best known to themselves, Clark and Partners Ltd., Mobility & Agecare Centres, manufacturers of stair-lifts, wheelchairs, walking sticks, ramps, etc. who operated out of nine different locations in Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire in England, U.K., have our article up on their website. Click here [2] to check it out. Flonto 02:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletions

I have (temporarily I hope) expunged the following nicknames, for which I can find no source as yet:
Hoover - Herb/Herby
Harding - The Great Handshaker and Babbitt in the White House
Wilson - Woody
Taft - God Knows Taft
McKinley - The Petticoat Pet
Ben Harrison - The Human Iceberg
Cleveland - Cleve
Arthur - Muttonchops
Buchanan - Old Fogey
Tyler - Traitor Tyler
Madison - The Little Man of the Palace
Jefferson - The Noble Agrarian
Washington - The General and King George
With the Hounds of Deletion baying for our blood, I thought that this was the safest bet. From now on, the smart move might be to add no more items to the list without identifying a source first.
I will continue to hunt down sources for the above, and for Eisenhower's nickname, "The Great Delegator".
In the meantime, if anyone has an unsourced nickname they want to share, the best place to post it is right here on the Discussion Page.
Flonto 01:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uh-Oh!

Some user has restored the above deletions, undoubtedly thinking that their removal was vandalism. It is nice that someone cares enough to do that. I have contacted him to inform him of the situation and will give him a chance to get back in touch before I do anything else. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flonto (talk • contribs) 19:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Update

Misunderstanding sorted out. Unsourced nicknames re-deleted. Flonto 20:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nickname - Reagan as "Teflon President?"

Google for "Ronald Reagan" "teflon president" pulls up 10,800 pages but I would not know which would qualify as "source"

For example - do these qualify?

The 'Time Magazine' source is dubious to give as a reference because with only that article for evidence, it could be that Time referred to him as The Teflon President only as a one-off joke. The 'Washington Times' source is perfect, because the article makes it clear that it is discussing a nickname that had real currency. Flonto 19:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

My first recollection of the nickname for Ronald Reagan as "Teflon Ron" was from Patricia Schroeder during her unsuccessful run as Vice President.Patnclaire 17:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)Patnclaire

[edit] Duckpin Comes Unstuck

Nickname "Duckpin" for Eisenhower – I seem to remember adding this one to the List after seeing it mentioned as an Eisenhower nickname in two different sources. I found out that it was his World War II codename, but I thought that perhaps it had subsequently stuck to him as a nickname. However, I have since failed to find any evidence that “Duckpin” was ever used except in its original context, as a codename.
Unless we are also going to include Secret Service codenames, such as “Elvis” for Clinton, “Timberwolf” for Bush Senior, “Lancer” for Kennedy, etc. (which I do not think qualify as nicknames for the purposes of this article), I propose to remove “Duckpin” from the List.
Meanwhile, in another part of the forest, I am pleased to see that we have been spared deletion, with votes to Keep outnumbering those to Delete by two-to-one. Shows what good taste Wikipedia users have!
Flonto 19:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List formatting

I don't contribute regularly to this article, so please forgive me if this has been brought up before.

The current formatting for the article is rather unappealing. It strains the eyes to read it. I suggest bulleting the separate nicknames, instead of merely line-spacing them. This would improve the readability of the article greatly.

Regards, Lifebaka 21:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rutherford Hayes - "Goody Two-Shoes"

This nickname was contributed to the List by a user but I have had to remove it because I cannot find a source. Will do best to track down source for this and other nicknames, viz. Eisenhower - The Great Delegator; Harding - The Great Handshaker and Babbitt in the White House; Wilson - Woody; McKinley - The Petticoat Pet; Cleveland - Cleve; Arthur - Muttonchops; Madison - The Little Man of the Palace; Jefferson - The Noble Agrarian; Washington - The General and King George.
Flonto 20:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duckpin Deleted

Deleted as per discussion above
Flonto 23:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] codenames

The Secret Service gave Jimmy Carter the codename "Dasher" (as a candidate, I guess). What other codenames are known? —Tamfang 03:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George W. Bush list

We should work on adding in the nicknames at Talk:List_of_nicknames_for_George_W._Bush. Wiwaxia (talk) 00:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Some books that mention the nickname Dumbya:

  • Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right by Ann Coulter

Excerpt - exBack Matter: "... 67. Roger Simon, "Is It Wrong to Call Him George Dumbya Bush?" U.S. News & World Report, July 19, 1999. 68. ..."

  • Campbell's High School/College Book of Lists by John P. Campbell

Excerpt - page 384: "... President, "Don't Wanna" President, Dubya, Dubya Dubya II President, Duhya, Dumbya, Education President, The Executioner, "Fatally Flawed" President, Gentleman "C" President, ..."

  • America's Meltdown: The Lowest-Common-Denominator Society by John Boghosian Arden

Excerpt - page 80: "... who was reportedly referred to by his opponents as "George `Dumbya' Bush." It is no wonder, therefore, that Bush (Jr. ..."

  • SchNEWS: Peace De Resistance - Annual 2003 by ???

Excerpt - page 34: "... is set to continue after a speech made by George `Dumbya' Bush just before he jetted off for a fund raising ..."

Which one should we choose? Wiwaxia (talk) 23:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article is backwards?

Why are the most recent presidents at the top of the list, and Washington at the bottom? This reversed chronological order is not standard style on Wikipedia. 24.30.82.227 (talk) 22:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grover Cleveland

I removed the part about him personally hanging men because the public executioner wasn't available. The main article on Cleveland says he didn't want to delegate the unpleasant task to an underling. Pha telegrapher (talk) 17:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What is the point/criteria/etc for this page?

I'm curious as to the reason this page exists. Many of the "nicknames" seem to go against the very policy at the top of the page (that being Biographies of Living Persons) at least for some of them. How is it decided that a nickname is notable enough for inclusion on the list? How are these "facts" meant to be verified? Seems like a vandalism and POV target without much real usefulness. I understand that names like "Slick Willie" and "Dubya" are probably notable and widely used enough to be here but, what about some of the others? What keeps people from just adding junk? Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)