Talk:Barack Obama Sr./Archive 1

Archive 1

The First Name

In the article he published in the East Africa Journal in 1965, which is mentioned in this Wikipedia article, Obama Sr. signed his named Barak H. Obama. (not Barack). See http://kwani.org/main/problems-facing-our-socialism-barak-h-obama/ and many other web links to he article. This may mean that his first name in Kenya was Barak, not Barack, and that he changed its spelling to Barack when he came to the U.S. or before he married Ann Dunham. I have tried to insert text to this effect in the article, but it was removed. I have no idea why. Can anyone please enlighten me? Thanks.

--Groucho (talk) 11:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Please point us to the exact date you did this, so we can find it. Thanks. GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:00, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I found something. One of your additions was tagged on 5 February 2009 as possible Original Research, with a request for a source. The Edit Summary read "‪ tag sentence re Obama Sr's motivations--is this stated in a reliable source?‬" Your other addition was removed here, with the Edit Summary "remove speculation." Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Recreated version

Please note that this page had been in the past been redirected per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barack Hussein Obama Sr. A new good-faith draft was created at Barack Obama Sr. and has now been moved here as history merge per a request at WP:RM, but also so that its merits as standalone article can be discussed. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Intro

I am not convinced that this should be a separate article, but if it is we need to be clear that his notability is strictly as Barack Obama's father. The lede has been reworked to reflect that - his position as an economist for the Kenyan government would not yield an article, so it is not the lead sentence. Also I included "absent" because he did not raise his son, and was not present for his growing up - they saw each other only once after he left the family. Tvoz |talk 05:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The word "absent" seems out of place to me in the lede. It seems too soon in the article to get into the amount of time he spent with his son (which wasn't much, but wasn't nothing either). --Allen (talk) 21:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It was pretty close to nothing; there was no ongoing relationship at all after he left when son was 2 yrs old. That's absent, and why I think his notabilty for a separate article is questionable. Tvoz |talk 05:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

"biological father" might be better than "absent father". This precisely defines the relationship by distinguishing the fellow from Obama's stepfather; in American English to have an "absent father" implies that the child does not have a father in the house (which Obama did ... a stepfather) and also has an inappropriately judgmental ring to it. rewinn (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe Obama himself refers to his biological father as being "absent" - it's not my word, nor am I am being judgmental about it. The problem with "biological" alone is it doesn't speak to the salient point of whether or not he was a part of his son's life, which I think should be in the lede. (Also, note that Barack only had a stepfather "in the house" for the few years he lived in Indonesia - for the majority of his growing up there was no father, biological or step, in his house or in his life.) I have no problem with using "biological", but I'd like to also get in that lede sentence the fact that Obama Sr. was not a part of the son's life after age 2. The details of Obama Sr's life beyond Barack from age 0-2 should be seen in that context - which I think "absent" expresses. So I'd be fine with "absent biological father" or anything else that gets at what I'm talking about. Tvoz |talk 16:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Bioglogical father is correct. The fact that biological had to be added implies that he was absent. In the for what it's worth department he did have a male in the household from age 10 on when his white maternal grandparents Stanley Dunham and [Madelyn Dunham]] raised him in Hawaii while his mother was off globe trotting. Americasroof (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

You cannot presume he is the biological father. Hence absent father is better. You don't have to comment on the scandal of it all if you don't want to. But you are obliged not to lie and mislead people, or to claim knowledge that you do not have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.183.191 (talk) 21:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say there was no male in the house, I responded to your the incorrect statement that his stepfather was the "father" in the house, that's all. And adding "biological" implies that there was another father, which was only true for a short time. Tvoz |talk 23:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

"Biological father" doesn't seem right to me either. I usually hear that term used in the context of adoption, when the person referred to as "father" is different from the "biological father." I think the lede should refer to Obama Sr. simply as the senator's "father," which is what his son usually calls him. --Allen (talk) 22:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Which is why I said "absent" in the first place. Tvoz |talk 23:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's separate the two words. Tvoz, I can't tell whether you agree with me that "biological" should go... what do you think? As for "absent," I am okay with the new sentence you inserted... I wouldn't have put it in the lede myself, but it is factual and neutral and gets the point across. Can we therefore remove the word "absent?" I think it is too subjective and I agree with Rewinn that it has a judgmental ring to it. --Allen (talk) 03:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm o.k. the way it's written. Here's another example Leslie Lynch King, Sr, the father of Gerald Ford. I am curious if the father even paid a dime of child support.Americasroof (talk) 07:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[out] Allen - I can go either way. If you and others feel strongly about it, it's ok with me to remove either or both "absent" and "biological", but only if the sentence (or a similar one) remains in the lede about his not being there to raise Barack. I think this is important to be included in the lede as his paternity is the only reason the article exists at all, but his notability is questionable to me seeing as how little he actually had to do with Barack. Hope this clarifies - it's late, so I can't tell if it's coherent enough. Tvoz |talk 07:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Tvoz. I'm removing "absent" and "biological" and leaving your new sentence. Americasroof, you said you were okay with the way it is now but you didn't say if you'd be okay with the change I'm making. Let us know if you're not. I think the Gerald Ford case is different, because our article suggests he was informally adopted by Gerald Ford, Sr... meaning "biological father" is useful for distinguishing King from Ford's adoptive (sort of) father. --Allen (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The lead still establishes that he was not in the picture for that long so I'm o.k. with it. Americasroof (talk) 15:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability

While this fellow is not the most notable person in the world, he *is* the main subject of a bestselling book by a leading political figure. Whether reasonable or not, the interest in him seems far to exceed that in the parents of other celebrities, e.g. Bill Clinton's father. Thus I would suggest he is sufficiently notable for his own article. rewinn (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Even if Obama Jr. is never elected President, his father is notable on two accounts (1) he's the subject of the # 1 bestseller on college campus bookstores (according to the Chronicle of Higher Education) and (2) he was the senior economist of a national government (Kenya). Bearian (talk) 18:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

There are many books written by notable people about people who aren't very notable. And although Barack is notable, nobody talks about the book that mentions his father. His best known work is his other book "The Audacity of Hope". Simply being talked about in a book or being mentioned by the media is something many people have gone through, many of which aren't considered notable enough to be given an article. He should be mentioned in the artcles Barack Obama and other minor articles relaed to him, but not given his own. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 02:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I actually think that there's no real need to have this separate article, but it is simply not true that "no one talks about the book that mentions his father" - it more than mentions his father, it is about his father and what he thinks about his father and his childhood, and it is talked about a great deal. Tvoz/talk 03:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that, I think the title and article imply that he's a major part of this book, and I wasn't trying to make light of that. What I'm saying is that this guy is already talked about in other articles where it's right for him to be included, but that there is no need for him to have his own article. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 05:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

He's quite notable in the sense that people want to know who Barack Obama, Jr's father is. Everyone out there in the right wing conspiracy circles was throwing claims about how Barack Obama Jr's a Muslim. Where does this come from? His Father! I personally side with Colin Powel's comments that religion should not matter, but its a focal point for many people in the USA and the world. A persons belief system in many cases has roots in his or her parents and upbringing. By knowing more about Obama Sr, we learn more about Obama, Jr. Its where Jr. gets his middle name, "Hussein". Moreover, President-Elect Obama wrote a book about Sr. Obama Sr. was an official in the Kenyan government. Yes, Obama Sr. is more notable than alot of other people that have pages here in Wikipedia. So the article should stay and be expanded so we can see what the relationship was between this man and the current President-Elect of the USA, Barack Obama, II. 98.119.212.174 (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I know many people who talk and about the father of the President of the United States. He is notable to me and many others. There were over 40 thousand page views for him last month, Feb 2015. (See http://stats.grok.se/en/201502/Barack_Obama,_Sr. ) Loveonearth (talk) 23:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

The conversation above dates from 2008-9, which Obama Sr's notability was much less assured than it is now. Tarc (talk) 23:31, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Since nobody in the world outside of Kenya would ever have an inkling that this person ever existed were it not for his son being president, the lead should be that he is the father (or biological father, or absent father if you prefer) of President Obama. The fact that he was an economist of note in Kenya is merely incidental. Had he not been the president's father, he would not have a Wikipedia article. The lead of any biography on Wikipedia should always be the principle reason the subject has an article about them in the first place. For anyone who would argue that he deserves a Wikipedia article based on being the subject of a book, that book would not be a household name were it not for Obama being president. Had he not been president, his book would be a relatively unknown book of little note and therefore it's main subject would have been of less note and therefore not significant enough to warrant his own Wikipedia article thus supporting my above statement even further. I am not even certain that this man even warrants his own Wikipedia article in any case since his relationship with his father was so sparse though since the president's mother gets an article, I concede it may be appropriate for balance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.144.213.97 (talk) 07:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Nyangoma-Kogelo

This article claims that Nyangoma-Kogelo is in Siaya District, while Barack Obama claims that is in Bondo District. Which one is it? Bash Kash (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you believe both are correct? At the time of Senior's birth Kyongoma-Kogelo was in Siaya District, but since then it has changed to Bondo District. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 03:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, I figured that. :-) Which one should we use on Wikipedia? (for consistency) Bash Kash (talk) 05:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

We can do both, using "(now in....)" rewinn (talk) 15:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

delete article

I propose this article be deleted. He is not notable. ObamaGirlMachine (talk) 01:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Support deleting. Not notable and there is no reason to think the person this article is about will be notable in the future WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Being mentioned a few times by the media doesn't make you notable. I'm using this same argument for all biography articles being nominated for deletion that are related to Barack Obama, it's clear that Michelle Obama is the only notable person given an article, the others all seem to be fluff. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 01:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Note - ObamaGirlmachine (above) is a problematic and potentially disruptive new WP:SPA account that has been canvassing others to come to this and other pages in an attempt to delete articles for Obama family members. Suggest speedy closure if these articles are nominated. - Wikidemo (talk) 17:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. My reasoning is this: Some in the public forum categorize him, Barack Hussein Obama II, (connoted or substituted as "accuse him") as Muslim. Barack Hussein Obama II is at the forefront of the public media (as of this writing October 29, 2008 @ 05:03h EST) through mostly western accessed medium. Although this categorization should be of no affect, there still exist many in the public who perpetuate the sentiment that being a Muslim harbours some potential for malfeasance. Regardless of this fact, as long as this sentiment is carried, it is in the public interest that his lineage and association be open to the public, whether for clarification or debate.

In addition Barack Hussein Obama II has made evident or notes in many public appearances, his sentiment and relationship (or lack thereof) with his father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. This inclusion into the public forum requires a reference to the validity of Barack Hussein Obama II's statements.

This topic and it's demand has been validated by Barack Hussein Obama II's inclusion of his father into the category of notable figures. It should be noted that the significance is not strong, however is sufficient in in maintaining this topic unless it is merged with that of Barack Hussein Obama II as a distinct sub-category, however such a result would be sub-optimal and contrary to who a notable figure is or how they shape first order relatives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.220.2 (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Religion

Since the religion field in the infobox was filled out yesterday with "Islam",[1] "Atheism" has been added,[2] taken off,[3] re-added,[4] and now "Islam" has been taken off.[5] Does anyone know what he was at the time of his death? I know he was raised in Islam, but was apparently an Atheist by the time Barack was born, but not sure if he shifted back to Islam when he returned to Kenya. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 22:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Muslim

Why is there no mention of Barack Obama, Sr being a muslim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.223.51.70 (talk) 21:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Probably because he was an atheist for at least a portion of his life (and it does mention his Islamic heritage).--67.176.175.133 (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Not only is The fact that him being Muslim not mentioned, But the evidence to prove that he was Agnostic was quoted by his Daughter Auma. In which there is no mention of her through out the whole page. Worth taking a look at. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.129.214 (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Muslim, again

Just found a Daniel Pipes essay at Front Page Magazine that (if correct) cuts through this non-moslem nonsense. Both his fathers were in fact moslem. Which nevertheless is no crime. In Islam it is a crime to leave your faith for another faith, but for a moslem to become atheist is something else again. I do not imply, that Obama should see himself as a moslem--Radh (talk) 18:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Front Page "Magazine" is not a reliable source for anything other than the opinion of its authors. --Loonymonkey (talk) 19:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC

Daniel Pipes is a crazy person, and should probably not be quoted for anything ever. Sorry, but conspiracy theorists are just not useful info sources for wikipedia. 59.167.111.154 (talk) 00:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Front page magazine is definitly not neutral. Is there any always reliable source in journalism? Even the NYT made mistakes. Obama Jr. sees himself as christian. When he is elected, the moslem countries will perhaps have other ideas and this might even work in his favour? -Radh (talk) 20:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama, Sr. will not be elected to any office. This is not a forum. Pls limit your comments to discussing how to improve the article at hand, based on Wikipedia standards. -- The Red Pen of Doom 20:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Article location

Should this be moved to "Barack Obama I" since his son is "Barack Obama II" and not "Barack Obama, Jr."?--67.176.175.133 (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

No - he was not known as such and that will only confuse readers. Tvoz/talk 15:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal/old: March-April 2008

I do not think this article should be merged. Michelle Obama and Barack Obama Senior have their own wikipedia pages, even though they are solely famous by relationship to Senator Obama. I think his grandmother deserves her own page too, especially since she's being quoted more and more often in the media.

I would ask that the notability and merge tags be removed. GreekParadise (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Considering that George W. Bush's great-great grandfather has an article of his own, I believe that Barack Obama's step-grandmother, who is still alive and giving interviews to the press, is notable enough to warrant an article. --Tocino 05:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If there's a problem, we could merge and redirect these lesser articles into a "Relatives of Barack Obama" article, and put a summary in the main Obama page with a link to the full article. That would be the most efficient, in my view. --Scharb 17:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scharb (talk • contribs)

I think that Sarah Obama plays a special role in Obama's life that the other Kenyan relatives do not play. There's a reason the media always goes to her for first comment. How about this compromise? We rename the "Sarah Obama" page to be "Sarah Obama and Barack Obama's relatives in Kenya." I think people are more likely to search for "Sarah Obama" than "Kenyan relatives of Barack Obama."GreekParadise (talk) 21:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

No, that's way too clumsy for a title (see WP:NAME). I'd agree with Scharb's suggestion, but unless editors of the other tiny sub articles for other relatives agree, there's no point in changing this one.Tvoz |talk 18:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal
What exactly is the July 2008 merge proposal? What are the reasons? Tvoz/talk 01:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Note that a new discussion re keeping Sarah's bio separate/merging it somewhere/deleting it has emerged over here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Obama.  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 16:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC) Update: it's now here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Obama.  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 21:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama, Sr. or Barack Obama I

As the birth certificate of Barack Obama makes it evident that he is Barack Hussein Obama II, and not Barack Obama, Junior does this article fall under Barack Obama I or the significantly more common and used Barack Obama, Senior? –– Lid^(Talk) 13:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll be honest with you. I have absolutely no idea which is correct. As an Englishman, the whole "Junior/Senior" thing is something I am wholly unfamiliar with. In Britain, it is uncommon to be named for one's father, so the issue rarely arises. It is possible that the international nature of the Obama family means that the way they refer to themselves may be a mix of different standards. I have not read any of Obama's books, but these may provide guidance on this issue. -- Scjessey (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

It does not come up because he doesn't refer to himself as "Junior" nor to his father as "Senior". simply referring to his father as "father" or as Barack. –– Lid^(Talk) 12:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Noroton (over on Talk:Barack Obama) is right about article name. "Sr." should definitely be in this article name. What we want as an article name is whatever people are most likely to search for (and what is most widely used in sources). However, the version of name that appears in the first sentence of an article (usually the first words) is supposed to be "full official name"; I think that argues against including the "Sr." in the lead, it's a popular designation but certainly not one he was born with, and probably not one he ever used in legal documents or the like. LotLE×talk 16:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Lulu. (Note that if ledes at "Barack Obama" and "Barack Obama, Sr." were to read Barack Hussein Obama II and Barack Hussein Obama, respecively, roman numerals for "the 2nd" and sans roman numerals would supply the necessary distinction lede-to-lede – while the article titles would remain distinct through retaining Sr. for Sen. Obama's father.)  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 19:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for agreeing. On a complete side point: what's the thing with misspelling "lead". I've seen other people do it do, occasionally, enough that I'm pretty sure it's deliberate not a typo (but it's a weird joke/pun if so). LotLE×talk 19:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

This usually doesn't work quite as well as it does in this instance, though. Eg "Theodore Roosevelt (September 22, 1831 – February 9, 1878) was the father of U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt, Jr...." maybe is less compelling? (As for the antique orthogrphy of lede: before linotype let alone IBM, type was made of lead and setters would generically refer to "lead" /lɛd/ to mean spacers they'd insert to space lines of text from each other, position lines of text between margins, as typespaces and the like: "Add lead," "Change lead," "Less lead," etc., they might write in the margin of a proof to an assitant. So when they wanted to distinguish between that and a fancy heteronym meaning "textual introduction," they came up with the practice of substituting an olde spelling of the same word to render it "Change lede," etc. – pronounced /liːd/. Cf. News style#Lede or lead.

(Yet – be that as it may – where does the practice of writing hed for "head"[line]; dek for "deck" [Oxford English Dictionary: "Part of a newspaper, periodical, etc., headline containing more than one line of type, esp. the part printed beneath the main headline"]; "graf" for "paragraph," as in nut graf for an intoductory summarizing paragraph; or Tk for "unwritten text to come" come from then?)  $\sim$ Justmeherenow (  ) 20:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's newsroom argot. Journalists spend their lives turning everybody else's specialized language into prose that a typical nonspecialist can understand and then among themselves (and now it leaks out at places like Wikipedia) writing argot. And therefore confusing people. I think some Wikipedia style pages have picked up this nonsense. I just looked it up: You can see here how we first talk about journalists not using argot -- in a paragraph introducing journalist argot. Note "jargon" in the first sentence and "jargon" describing the first item. Hypocrites! Noroton (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible bias in certain source

Perhaps it's just me, but the current source #5 <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=431908&in_page_id=1770> referenced in talking about Obama Sr.'s conversion to Islam does not read like a reliable and neutral source - it seems much like a tabloid smear, and the Daily Mail is currently published as a tabloid. I would recommend this article be checked for neutrality. 76.247.14.237 (talk) 01:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the article doesn't seem to be a reliable source. For example, it refers to his uncle Said Obama as as "cousin", even though the following sentence includes a quote where he says that Barack Obama Sr. was his "father's older brother". I recommend that it not be used a source, as it provides an "investigation" on Obama's father, yet it does not provide a single source to back-up its claims. Of course, I'm curious if anyone disagrees. What do people think? Khoikhoi 23:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to be bold and remove the source. There are two things now in the article that are probably true but need to be properly sourced:

• Before working as a cook for missionaries in Nairobi, Onyango had travelled widely, enlisting with the name Onyango Obama in the British colonial forces during World War I and visiting Europe, India, and Zanzibar, where he converted from Christianity to Islam and added Hussein to his name. The bit about him adding Hussein to his name after he converted to Islam isn't in the cited article (unless I'm missing something), so it needs to have a better ref.
• She did not know that he already had a wife in Kenya. I believe this is mentioned in Dreams from My Father, but this needs to be verified as well. The previous source was deleted for the above reasons.

Khoikhoi 06:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "STFamilyTree" :
  • {{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4406813.ece | title=Barack Obama’s brother pushes Chinese imports on US | work=Times Online| accessdate=2008-07-27}}
  • {{cite web|url=http://www.suntimes.com/images/cds/MP3/obamatree.pdf | title=Chicago Sun Times Barack Family Tree | work=Chicago Sun Times | accessdate=2008-03-23}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 15:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Problem with dates

The caption under the photograph in this article reads "Obama, Sr. with son, Barack c.1977". On the other hand, the article itself says they never met after 1972. Obviously something is wrong, but I don't know what. If anybody knows, please correct this.--Gorpik (talk) 17:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Suffix usage

given the article is about obama, sr., it is clear who is being referenced. --emerson7 02:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Not really, as his only notability comes from his association with Barack Obama [Jr.] whose name is mentioned throughout the article. It's important to be clear who we're actually talking about in any given paragraph. Loonymonkey (talk) 02:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

per wp:mos, subsequent usage of a person's name should be last name only. when used to differentiate from one with a shared last name, first name is to be used. when first name is also shared, the suffix should then be used. given the logic of your argument, every article with an individual with a postnomial should follow your rule, and i couldn't find one example of that in my decidedly informal search on wiki or anywhere else. --emerson7 03:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

A more important consideration is to be clear and not mislead. MOS is a guideline, and it clearly says right up front:

This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Editors should follow it, except where common sense and the occasional exception will improve an article.

This is a good example of a time that this particular part of MOS should not be followed. The use of the "Sr." clarifies which Obama we're talking about, and the need for clarity trumps any need for adhering to a guideline. I'm reverting to the clearer wording. Tvoz/talk 04:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

rubbish...this article is about obama sr.. if you wish to deviate from common sense and wp:name, you must first obtain consensus. --emerson7 20:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

No special consensus needed. We deal with this all the time when covering parents and children, husbands and wives, etc. In many articles editors try to find some unobtrusive way to let the reader know which one we're talking about, e.g. Mr. So-and-So told his wife..... etc..... or "Missie Vanderbilt" told her sister Minnie.... It's best to avoid awkward stuff like referring to people by first name. Clarity is the goal. It's really case by case, and a matter for editorial discretion until and unless MOS has more detailed guidelines for how to deal with this. Wikidemon (talk) 21:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, this is an exception to WP:NAMES. Obama and Barack are both used multiple times thorough the article to describe different people. It is best to be concise in this case. regards, --guyzero | talk 22:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

←I am taking the above comments by myself, Loonymonkey, Wikidemon and Guyzero to be consensus that we need to clearly differentiate Obama Sr from the Senator, and as such I am reinstating my edits which emerson7 had again reverted. Clarity is indeed the goal, and the clearest way I can see to handle this is by referring the the father as "Sr.". If there are other ideas for how to handle this, please post them here on talk, rather than ignoring the consensus that has formed. Tvoz/talk 04:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

The problem arises is that Barack Obama, Sr. was never referred to, in his lifetime, as Barack Obama, Sr. He was just Barack Obama (or Barack Hussein Obama I). The Sr. designation is a misnomer made by modern re-constructions who simply assume the suffix existed but it did not. As for the potential confusion... I will refer to that John Quincy Adams' article refers to him as Adams, and not Q. Adams to differntiate from his father, as with George W. Bush and George H. W. Bush. Although the potential for confusion is there, we should not be inserting made up suffixes simply for the sake of clarity - they need better justification. –– Lid^(Talk) 12:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

We are well aware of that, Lid - but the potential for misunderstanding and misleading information is high here, and the editors on this page have agreed that clarity trumps guideline. I could go along with putting the "Sr" in parentheses in the text, but I won't go along with sentences that can be misconstrued to mean the son, rather than the father. I think it's pretty obvious which ones they are - involving place of birth, religion, multiple marriages, etc. We are an encyclopedia, and our goal is to provide verifiable information in a non-biased manner and we have an obligation to not allow misleading wording to be included in an article just so that we can adhere strictly to a guideline. The use of "senior" is therefore the best way we've found to distinguish the two individuals and not confuse or mislead. Tvoz/talk 17:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

And, by the way, some sources refer to him as "Sr" - see, for example, this one. Others have had to deal with the same ambiguity and confusion and apparently reached the same conclusion we did. Tvoz/talk 17:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Chronology

Tvoz, the chronology is now messed up, I'm afraid.

If Ann Dunham took her one-month-old son to visit Mercer Island, then that would have been in 1961, right?[6] Her husband did not graduate from University of Hawaii until June of 1962, right?[7] So how could she have been travelling to see him at Harvard when she made that visit to Mercer Island?

Also, Ann Dunham was enrolled at University of Washington in spring 1962,[8] which was before her husband had graduated from University of Hawaii. How could she have enrolled at UW after visiting her husband at Harvard, as the article now says?Ferrylodge (talk) 03:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Didn't see this note here - this is discussed at Talk: Ann Dunham. Tvoz/talk 23:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Number of car crashes

Was there one or two? Did he first lose his legs and later his life, or was it one and the same automobile accident? CapnZapp (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, 76.169.116.9! CapnZapp (talk) 16:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

There seem to have been three serious car crashes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.64.255 (talk) 15:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Goatherd?

Why is there no mention of this? Is it in fact fabricated  ? 14:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.112.193 (talk)

?????????????????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.34.209 (talk) 11:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

The guy was a noted academic economist working in the Kenyan government and in academic posts in the united states. Not a frigging goat hearder lol. Most definately fabricated lol. 59.167.111.154 (talk) 00:08, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Etymology of "Obama"

Need etymology of the name "Obama." Apparently, like "Onyango" (in the morning), "Otieno" (in the evening), or "Owino" (tangled in the umbilical cord), "Obama" (literally "crooked") is a name dictated by the circumstances of one's birth, in this case given to people born with a physical disability or with some deformity of the legs. Badagnani (talk) 03:45, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Religion

I know. Old story. But, according to Obama Jr., (here) his dad was an atheist. Let's not impose our beliefs about their beliefs on people. I deleted the religion entry from the infobox. --Regents Park (bail out your boat) 18:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Request for protection

Tabloids are not appropriate for sources. If contentious information cannot be backed by reliable sources, it should not be added. Users who add such sources should be warned and, if the edits are repeated, blocked. Thus, request for protection has been declined. Warn and request blocking as appropriate. لennavecia 02:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Daily mail

Daily Mail is a reputable source and not a tabloid .Particurly as it is not the single source.Please check the .Newsweek which is a reliable sources also states he was a polygamist Please do not revert in a content dispute.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The Daily Telegraph [9] and Newsweek are certainly reliable sources. Yoda swe (talk) 15:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

See above. Khoikhoi 07:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps Daily Mail is not a reputable source but we also mentioned The Daily Telegraph and Newsweek, which you of course already knew! "The Daily Telegraph is a British broadsheet newspaper, founded in 1855. Excepting the Financial Times and The Herald (Glasgow), it is the only remaining national daily newspaper printed on traditional newsprint in the broadsheet format in the United Kingdom, as most other broadsheet publications have converted to the smaller tabloid/compact or Berliner formats." Many reliable newspapers such as The Times are now published in tabloid format. Now I will change Daily Mail to Newsweek so please stop reverting. Yoda swe (talk) 17:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:RS says, "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." The only one of your sources that meets this criteria is Newsweek. I'll add that one. Khoikhoi 06:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

If daily newspapers, such as The Daily Telegraph, were not reliable sources, more than 50% of the references in this article and the Barack Obama article would have be deleted, so your claim is not true. The problem with Obama's quotation "I consider myself a serial polygamist," Obama Sr. once told a friend. "That is, one wife at a time." is that it can be missunderstood since he was married to more than one wife at a time. Yoda swe (talk) 09:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe I ever said all daily newspapers were not reliable. I said that the Daily Telegraph is not reliable, and most of the people at the link Pharaoh of the Wizards has cited seem to basically agree. After having read pages 421 to 423 of Dreams from My Father, you are correct that he left behind Kezia in Kenya when he left for America. I was about to add this information to the article when I realized that it was already there:

At the age of 23, Obama Sr. enrolled at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, leaving behind a pregnant Kezia and their infant son. He had already turned away from Islam and become an atheist by the time he moved to the United States.[8] Barack Obama Sr.'s daughter Auma has commented that her father "was never a Muslim although he was born into a Muslim family with a Muslim name."[12]

Therefore, it is redundant to add the polygamy quote or mentioning that he was a bigamist. The information is already there. Anyone can see that he left behind his first wife and married his second wife in the U.S. Khoikhoi 08:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I took the issue to Reliable sources and please check the discussion Daily Mail discussion in Reliable sources/Noticeboard and this achived older discussion Daily Mirror n Reliable sources/Noticeboard I do feel that the concensus from the discussion above is use it with other sources and not as a single source and I feel user Yoda swe edit is well sourced.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you Yoda swe if the The Daily Telegraph ,Daily Mail or Daily Mirror are not reliable sources atleast 40% of the references in all articles should be removed as the sources are well below them which are over 100 year old British newspapers particularly when we are not using as the single source.Sorry to say I disagree with them not being RS sources .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Obama Barack, Sr.

Some ignorant or forgetful people might accidentally search "Obama Barack, Sr." or "Obama Barack Sr." and find no article. Shouldn't it be redirected to "Barack Obama, Sr."? Zheliel (talk) 10:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll edit it. Zheliel (talk) 10:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

"contradictory" tag

I removed a tag on the "early life" section that said it is contradictory - please give an explanation here of what is seen as contradictory, so editors can address it. Thank you. Tvoz/talk 21:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Here's a verbatim copy-quote of section with the contradictory parts highlighted:

“ Obama Sr. was born in Kanyadhiang village, Rachuonyo District on the shores of Lake Victoria just outside Kendu Bay, Kenya, at the time a colony of the British Empire, and raised in the village of Nyang’oma Kogelo, Siaya District. He was the son of Hussein Onyango Obama (c. 1895-1979) and his second wife, Akumu Habiba. His family are members of the Luo ethnic group. Obama Sr. was raised as a Muslim, but later became an atheist. Before working as a cook for missionaries in Nairobi, Onyango had travelled widely, enlisting with the name Onyango Obama in the British colonial forces and visiting Europe, India, and Zanzibar, where he converted from Christianity to Islam. Onyango had at least three wives; Barack Obama Sr. was the son of Akumu, the second wife. However, he was raised by Onyango's third wife, Sarah, after Akumu left her family and separated from her husband in 1945. Obama Sr. was married in 1954 at the age of eighteen, in a tribal ceremony to Kezia, with whom he had four children. ”

I hope I've answered your question. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 21:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok - it was Barack Senior's father, Onyango Obama, who converted from Christianity to Islam. Barack Senior was raised in a Muslim home but became an atheist as a young man, before coming to Hawaii. Thanks for bringing it up, as perhaps the section needs to be clearer. Tvoz/talk 22:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Bibliography Section

The bibliography section for this article looks non-standard. I think it needs the attention of an expert.Jarhed (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it was odd - I've incorporated the monograph he wrote into the text and eliminated the other entry that was not directly relevant to him. Tvoz/talk 23:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, cheers!Jarhed (talk) 04:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Arabic spelling of his first name

There's a dispute over the meaning of his name going on and I can't find the answer. I went to a Muslim baby naming site and found these four translations:

• Baraq (برق) Electricity.

• Buraq (براق) Horse of the Prophet (PBUH).

• Barraq (براق) Flashing, bright, brilliant, glittering. (This one has identical script to Buraq)

• Mubarak (مبارک) Blessed, fortunate, lucky, auspicious, august.

Can anyone find the Arabic spelling (or original if not in Arabic script) of Obama Sr. given name? I searched the Arabic Wiki and none of the Arabic character phrases I list above are found in the article. Alatari (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's debate whether the origin of the name in his case is even Arabic or some other Semitic variation. But seeing as how he wasn't Arabic and didn't come from an Arabic-speaking country, it doesn't seem to have much relevance to this article. --Loonymonkey ([[User

If people are wanting to come here and read about the English translation of his first name then it's relevant. The script of Swahili was originally in Arabic... Much of Swahili is borrowed from Arabic because of the trade and proximity to Arabia. So was this name borrowed from Muslim tradition or was it just a popular name at the time? He was a professed Muslim at least for a time. Alatari (talk) 15:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no English translation. His name is spelled "Barack." --Loonymonkey (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Cite your source that his name has no meaning or his parents meant none. Alatari (talk) 15:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Barack is also a Swahili word. Same definition as the Arabic word "blessed one" and probably originally came from the Arabic language when Arabic slave traders came into Africa looking for slaves, but none the less, pointing at an Arabic definition and claiming the name is Arabic is missing the point. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 22:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Like you said it is probably a borrowed word. The point is to quell the rumors by determining the origin of the name by finding an interview record by Jr. or Sr. or Jr.s Mother or a birth certificate, something to show the intent of the parents and what they meant by the name. Saying this is impossible is just avoiding the point. Since there is a rumor and the President has a public image to maintain the information maybe out there. Now have I been clear enough? I'm hoping someone who has researched this page heavily might have the answer in their bookmarks of sources or be able to find it more easily than on my attempts. Alatari (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

We're not here to quell rumors, just write an encyclopedia based on reliable sources. But it's not really clear to me what it is you're proposing for the article. It's sounds like it might be veering into original research, but I'm not really sure. Can you be more specific, in terms of the article itself, how you feel it should be edited? --Loonymonkey (talk) 16:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not OR to request a source for Obama Sr.s birth certificate or a family historians writings or a genealogy chart. Besides his father: Family of Barack Obama#Hussein Onyango Obama "According to his third wife, Sarah, he originally converted to Catholicism, but took the name Hussein when he later converted to Islam; she said he passed the name, not the religion, on to his children.[49]" and his mother: Family of Barack Obama#Habiba Akumu Obama "Luos are given name related the circumstances of their birth and Akumu means mysterious birth, a conception after a birth, but before resumption of menses.[50] She took the name Habiba upon her conversion to Islam." Both parents were Islam converts and that article is focused on the meanings of the family members names. I'm not asking for anything that Family of Barack Obama editors haven't researched and added to that article.

"Luos are given name related the circumstances of their birth" so is Barack a Luos word given at his birth or a Muslim name passed on by his parents who both had converted to Islam? If it's Luo what does it mean? If it's Muslim what does it mean? 71.86.156.73 (talk) 05:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Death

The phrasing of the final paragraph seems to imply, at least to some extent, a connection between the alcoholism and the car crashes. I'm not sure if this is the case or not, but could it be spelled out more explicitly. (Breaking the paragraph into two would suffice if it isn't the case.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.212.4.3 (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Partner

At least 2 of the women he was associated with were married to him. Shouldn't they go under spouses, not partners? Should this man's bigamy explicitly be pointed out? Even if having multiple wives was OK for him, clearly it was not for Barack's mother. ggb667

Multiple marriage is alright in that culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.152.127 (talk) 17:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

1. Talk: Barack Obama, Senior#List Cleanup. Disagreement about the first name of the subject. According to the way he signed his article in Note 29 it was Barak, not Barack. This should be stated at the beginning of the article. I have tried to do this, but my insertion was repeatedly deleted, and I have no idea why or by whom.

19:33, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Mark's book and his children's names

A paragraph on Mark's new book was added with information relevant to Obama Sr. I copyedited it, did the citation template and moved a few bits to earlier in the article. I added Kezia into the timeline of fatherhood and named the children. The family of Barack Obama article has some mention that Abo and Bernard are illegitimate and fathered during Obama Sr.'s third marriage. I can't find the sources. I can't find the source that mentions the year and 'in a tribal ceremony' marriage to Kezia. Some help please? Alatari (talk) 02:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Birthdate

The cited source (from The Standard says that Obama was born in 1936; no birthdate is specified.[10] However an April 4 birthdate is stated in the infobox and now in the text as well. I have so far found no source for this. Unless a reliable source is identified, this should be deleted. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

This April 4 was probably simply made up by an anon, and that's exactly the way how hoaxes of our times are spreading. Gyurika (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

How about this as a citation, from makingofanation.com?DrConspiracy61 (talk) 04:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Given the close correspondence of that site's text with the text of the article here, I'd have to guess that site is a mirror of the Wikipedia article. --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The only other source I know of is the Find A Grave web site. What's interesting about that site is that it gives a close-up photo of the Obama tombstone (which shows only a year of birth and a year of death). There are certainly Kenyans of that period who do not have a known date of birth. This one is a puzzle, but I would agree that if we can't source the information, then the 1936 year of birth is it.DrConspiracy61 (talk) 14:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Birthdate has remained unsourced for almost nine months, and Google searches suggest that its presence on this page has resulted in its republication on many other sites since. Since no one has been able to source it for the better part of a year, I've removed it. Lorencollins (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

We have new information that about Obama Sr.'s date of birth from Obama's Immigration file form recently released under the Freedom of Information Act, see Released files on Scibd. The date is given variously in the documents (at least 4 times for each date) as June 18, 1934 and June 18, 1936. Given that the 1936 date is well sourced -- even on Obama's tombstone in Kenya, I think it's appropriate to add June 18 to the existing 1936 date in the article Kevin (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Obama Sr.'s Kenyan passport from 1959 shows his birth date as June 18, 1934. See [11]. An Immigration and Naturalization Service document from 1964 again shows 1934 as the year of birth. See [12]. Both images appear on numerous websites, including this one: [13]. Seneca91 (talk) 17:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Misstatement by then-Sen. Obama

The last paragraph of the Kenya section focuses on a misstatement by then-Senator Obama regarding support by the Kennedy's for his father's scholarship.

There are certain elements of the paragraph that are factual statements regarding Obama Sr. and the scholarship that could be added to the preceding paragraph, so that would read:

In 1959, Obama Sr. received a scholarship in economics through a program organised by nationalist leader Tom Mboya. The program offered Western educational opportunities to outstanding Kenyan students. (Initial financial supporters of the program included Harry Belafonte, Sidney Poitier, Jackie Robinson, and Elizabeth Mooney Kirk, a literacy advocate who provided most of the financial support for Obama Sr.'s early years in the United States, according to the Tom Mboya archives at Stanford University. Funds provided the following year by John F. Kennedy's family paid off old debts and subsidized student stipends, therefore indirectly benefiting Obama Sr. and other members of the 1959 cohort.") When Obama Sr. left for America, he left behind his infant son, Roy, and his young wife, Kezia, who was pregnant with their daughter, Auma.

The remaining elements of the present last paragraph of that section concern statements by then-Senator Obama that were criticized in the media and for which his campaign spokesman issued a statement acknowledging the error. These remaining elements do not provide any factual information about Barack Obama Sr. With the above change to the second paragraph, should the third paragraph be deleted or moved (in its entirety or in part) to another entry. If so, to where? Should a link to the entry be included here?

Update: After comparing the above-noted criticisms to the controversies section of the Barack_Obama_presidential_primary_campaign,_2008 entry, I suggest retaining at most a factual description of the criticism and acknowledgement. The third paragraph should be reduced to an addition to the parenthetical expression in the middle of the second paragraph as follows:

In 1959, Obama Sr. received a scholarship in economics through a program organised by nationalist leader Tom Mboya. The program offered Western educational opportunities to outstanding Kenyan students. (Initial financial supporters of the program included Harry Belafonte, Sidney Poitier, Jackie Robinson, and Elizabeth Mooney Kirk, a literacy advocate who provided most of the financial support for Obama Sr.'s early years in the United States, according to the Tom Mboya archives at Stanford University. Funds provided the following year by John F. Kennedy's family paid off old debts and subsidized student stipends, therefore indirectly benefiting Obama Sr. and other members of the 1959 cohort." As noted in a 3/30/08 Washington Post article, then-Senator Obama had twice misspoken during the campaign that the Kennedys organized the airlift. An Obama spokesman acknowledged the error the following day.) When Obama Sr. left for America, he left behind his infant son, Roy, and his young wife, Kezia, who was pregnant with their daughter, Auma.

The third paragraph would then be deleted.

His father also made all his wives convert to Islam.

This sentence apparently applies to the father of Hussein Onyango Obama (who would be great-grandfather to the President), who is unnamed in the article, but there is no statement that Hussein Onyango Obama himself made all his wives convert to Islam. (fotoguzzi)76.105.160.69 (talk) 16:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

He was a polygamist

(1) When Barack Sr. married Ann Dunham he was already married to another woman. (2) Being married to two woman at the same time makes you a polygamist. (3) This is a fact that is supported by a reliable source. (4) It was added in a NPOV manner. (6) The fact that he was a polygamist is an integral part of who he was therefore it is notable. An editor keeps removing this fact about him. I will return it to the article.--InaMaka (talk) 01:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

There is no actual proof for any of this. One off-hand comment in an Obama hit piece penned by Dinesh D'Souza of all people does not really rate too highly on the credibility scale. "Exceptional claims require exceptional sources is a threshold quotes on one of or policy/guidelines pages (the exact one escapes me offhand) and this certainly does not meet that. Tarc (talk) 02:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Tarc is correct. And the valid information is already in the article in a more neutral manner, so this is not only poorly sourced, it is repetitive. Tvoz/talk 07:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Kisumu

If anyone is interested, I was wondering whether we could work together to update the Kisumu page (before cleaning up the Nyanza province one) which currently reads like a travel brochure, which is very undeserving for a leading town in East Africa. If possible could you constructively help me make it better, I am hoping to get together a work group of contributers to help out so that it is something close to the Nairobi page. I will be working on this for the next week or two, if you have some spare time I will be glad if you could help me open up Kisumu to the world. Thanks!--Krator1 (talk) 22:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Massive rewrite

This massive rewrite is so large and pushes together new sources with old ones in ways that don't support the facts that we will have to revert and rebuild the sources. Alatari (talk) 00:27, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

The text seems well written and NPOV. It's the sources that are a mess. They need to be one source per reference so that all editors can follow these changes. Alatari (talk) 00:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Here is a sandbox version to correct the sourcing in: sandbox source repair. Going back to pre Jan 21st version till sources are fixed. Alatari (talk) 00:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

To address your concerns:

• I removed the disputed Corsi wnd.com citation[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=226349] with images of a 29 May 1962 letter to Tom Mboya from Barack Obama, Sr. at 1482 Alencastre Street (in the St. Louis Heights neighborhood of Honolulu)
• I removed the disputed Corsi wnd.com citation[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=229417] with images of a 20 June 1962 Honolulu Star-Bulletin article and a 22 June 1962 The Honolulu Advertiser article about Obama, Sr.
• I added a reference for the 22 June 1962 Honolulu Advertiser article by John Griffin and a quote from the article.
• I removed the redundant Rondeau thepostemail.com reference[14] that said Ann Dunham’s University of Washington classes began in September 1961—the Dougherty HistoryLink.org 10 February 2009 article[15] separately cited already says this.
• I removed a redundant Dougherty HistoryLink.org 7 February 2009 citation[16]—the Dougherty HistoryLink.org 10 February 2009 article[17] should be sufficient.
• I removed the unnecessary East–West Center citation[18]—and left the citation of the Anthropology News article by Dewey[19][20] that says "her new husband was Javanese"
• I split references for the Obama-Nidesand marriage,[21] 1971 separation,[Obama (1995, 2004), p. 126; Obama (1995, 2004), p. 216], and 1973 divorce[22][23]
• I added a reference for the 1964 Obama v. Obama Hawaii divorce file[24]
• I added a reference for a 12 September 2008 The Honolulu Advertiser article by Dan Nakaso[25] and a quote from the article about the 1965 marriage of Lolo Soetoro and Ann Dunham.
• I added a reference for a 2009 East–West Center press release[26] that mentioned Lolo Soetoro's 21-month East-West Center grant from September 1962 to June 1964.
• I added a reference for a 2010 University of Hawaii Department of Geography department history article[27] that mentioned Lolo Soetoro's June 1964 M.A. in geography.

Per your request, no "old sources" are now "pushed together" with "new sources."

Per your request, no references now have more than one citation (though some should, e.g. the resulting six references for Barack Obama II being born at Kapiolani Hospital makes article text harder to read).

Newross (talk) 19:22, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Not enough - I have removed the "birther" primary sources, added without any discussion here. This is original research, and we cannot verify the accuracy of these documents, so they are not acceptable source material. Please see if you can find reliable tertiary or secondary sources for these fact points or we can live with less specific dates of events, which are not essential to the understanding of the subject. Tvoz/talk 23:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I removed the 20 March 1964 effective date of the Obama-Dunham divorce, removed the date of the 15 March 1965 Soetoro-Dunham marriage in Molokai, and removed the dates of the Ann Dunham Soetoro 21 October 1971–January 1972 Honolulu visit which bracketed the Barack Obama, Sr. December 1971 Honolulu visit.

Note: the 20 March 1964 effective date of the Obama-Dunham divorce had been in the article for 18 months, added—without a source or an edit summary—on 2 August 2009 by 66.8.211.97 (talk).

Newross (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Parts of "Early Life" don't clearly differentiate between subject and father

"Before working as a cook for missionaries in Nairobi, Onyango had travelled widely, enlisting in the British colonial forces and visiting Europe, India, and Zanzibar, where he converted from Roman Catholicism to Islam and took the name Hussein. His father also made all his wives convert to Islam. Hussein Onyango was jailed by the British for six months in 1949 due to his involvement in the Kenyan independence movement. According to Sarah Onyango Obama, Onyango was subjected to brutal torture which caused permanent physical disabilities.[14] Although Obama Sr. was born into a Muslim and Christian family,[15] he became an atheist as a young man." :

This appears under the "Early Life" section of Barack Obama Sr, but is mostly about his father, Hussein Onyango Obama. The wording is strange, and only the last sentence is actually about the subject of the article. This should probably be clarified.

98.14.196.175 (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

The paragraph is a bit strange, but the only part I consider actually unclear is "His father also made all his wives convert to Islam.", which has already been pointed out above. Unlike the editor above, I read that as a poor attempt to identify Barack Sr.'s father, not grandfather, but it probably needs to be checked out and clarified either way. Any other suggestions on what you'd like changed? Fat&Happy (talk) 03:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was incorrectly stated - Onyango (Obama Sr's father) is the one who converted and presumably had his wives convert, but I'm looking for a source for that. I also separated out the last sentence which should not have been put back into that paragraph. Also reinstated another earlier paragraph break that had been lost. Tvoz/talk 06:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

• please don't corrupt this article for political reasons. I, and many others, look to Wikipedia for reliable and unbiased information. Yet, there seems to be an agenda here, or unintentional misinformation, or error of synthesis, not sure. In this article it says that Obama Sr went back to Kenya in 1965, yet it is known he was in Massachusetts receiving an M.A. from Harvard in 1965. which is says before the heading "Return to Kenya" but there is no reliable source that says he returned to Kenya of that year. In his mother's article it says "She took classes at the University of Washington from September 1961 to June 1962, and lived as a single mother in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle with her son while her husband continued his studies in Hawaii.[14][21][25][26][27] When Obama Sr. graduated from the University of Hawaii in June 1962, he was offered a scholarship to study in New York City[28] but he declined it, preferring to attend the more prestigious Harvard University.[17] He left for Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he would begin graduate study at Harvard in the fall of 1962.[16] Dunham returned to Honolulu and resumed her undergraduate education at the University of Hawaii with the spring semester in January 1963. During this time, her parents helped her raise the young Obama. Dunham filed for divorce in January 1964, which Obama Sr. did not contest.[1] Obama Sr. received a M.A. in economics from Harvard in 1965[29]"

It may be the "birthers" trying to introduce their conspiracy theories. Or it could be those on the left trying to keep this alive until 2012 to make it look like the GOP and the Tea Party were purposely slamming Obama Jr. on his religion, birth, eligibility for POTUS etc. It could be all, or none, of them. There has to be some one, preferably someone who is capable of no bias to workon this and edit the articles to be consistent and more clear on the dates. I would like to judge for myself, and I'm sure many others do too, on what is reliable information and not political agenda.

Also the word "cohorts" in this article should be looked into for personal bias. I removed that paragraph because it wasn't sourced-John in CinciIP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.23.189 (talk) 16:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

1959 cohort

"Funds provided the following year by John F. Kennedy's family paid off old debts of the project and subsidized student stipends, thereby indirectly benefiting Obama Sr. and other members of the 1959 cohort."

This is what the source says, "The former executive director of the African-American Students Foundation, Cora Weiss, said some of the money provided by the Kennedys was used to pay off old debts and subsidize student stipends. Even though Obama Sr. arrived the previous year, he and other members of the 1959 cohort benefited indirectly from Kennedy family support. "

The sentence in the article seems to be implying something not quite fair and balanced. The use of the word "cohort", for example, seems to imply something illegal, or at the least something that could be a negative. Wikipedia's own dictionary describes the word as "An accomplice; an associate in crime", even though it is used in the source, it is taken out of context. -John in CinciIP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.23.189 (talk) 18:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

The most common use of cohort today is in the sense “group” or “company.”^[28] That's how I read it in the article. The wiktionary:cohort entry was incorrect or rather, gave WP:UNDUE weight to the use of "cohort" in crimes. I fixed this. There's also Cohort on Wikipedia which does not mention the criminal cohort at all. --Marc Kupper|talk 20:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, I've encountered the word "cohort" in the sense meant in the source when dealing with British academia (what Americans would call a "class" of students, or a group progressing through a program together, is sometimes called a "cohort" there) but not commonly used in American English in this neutral sense, which may be why we have this difference in opinion about its implication. This word is not at all crucial to our article, however - and our text was uncomfortably close to the source wording anyway - so I changed it to something perhaps more immediately comprehensible to a wider audience. We shouldn't be using a term that while technically correct, requires use of a wikilink to explain it, if it is not essential to making the point, which this is not. Tvoz/talk 17:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you - at the time I did the wikilink I could not think of a clean substitute that accurately reflected what the source material had. I like the resulting "1959 group of scholarship holders." --Marc Kupper|talk 00:47, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

British or American English spelling?

To the best of my recollection, all of the Obama set of articles use American spelling, even though a few of the individuals are/were British subjects. I think for consistency sake this article should also continue to use American spelling as it was originally and for a long time. Family of Barack Obama, which was an offshoot of Barack Obama and which is essentially the parent article of this Barack Obama Sr. piece, uses American spelling last time I looked. A change here should have been preceded by discussion, so, thoughts? Tvoz/talk 21:23, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

You're right; the changes can be reverted without a discussion. AD 21:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, since the article contains the {{Use dmy dates}} and {{EngvarB}}/{{Use British English}} templates, I don't see why it would be necessary to discuss changes to conform apparent erroneous usage to the stated article standard. If there was an objection to defining that standard, wouldn't the appropriate time to discuss it have been last June, when the templates were added? Or possibly back at the beginning of 2009, when the most obvious date, date of death in the lead, was inserted in dmy format? Is there an archived discussion showing the consensus to treat all Obama's extended family as "American" for purposes of English variation usage? I honestly don't care that much either way, but if Obama Sr. is one of the few family members to merit a separate article based on his own notability, it would seem it should be treated the same as those of other citizens and government officials of Kenya. Alternatively, the article should simply be re-merged into the family article. Fat&Happy (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Those templates were added here without any discussion that I am aware of, the single edit that particular contributor made here, and with a somewhat inscrutable edit summary that yes, I missed. Didn't notice the templates either. And apparently neither did the other regular editors here, adding material with American English spelling afterward, leaving this article internally inconsistent as well as not lining up with the others in the group. And having the date in dmy format doesn't jump out at me either - I use that format myself frequently even though I'm American and use American spelling. Sure, it would have been appropriate to discuss this back when it was added - it would have been appropriate for the editor who came here and did that unilaterally to discuss it first in fact - but now is when I noticed it, and noticed the inconsistency within the article and in relation to the other Obama articles that I also have been editing for years. So great, let's discuss it now. But first I;m going to revert back to the way the article was for the first three years, and as the others in the set are. And for the record, although I have racked up by far the most edits on this article, I was not in favor of having this separate article it - but consensus was for it, so I just try to make it as good as possible, and not be a coat-rack for other agendas. Tvoz/talk 06:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I have no objection to discussing this now; I do object to the tone of the first two posts in this section. As stated above, there was absolutely no reason for discussion prior to making changes conforming an article about a UK/Kenyan citizen to articles about other UK and Kenyan citizens and to the style preferences stated in the article itself.

As far as I can tell, there are only two relevant "articles in the group" – this one and Lolo Soetoro (Zeituni Onyango, another internally inconsistent article, is close, but she is now a U.S. resident and the article is proposed for merge). Again, where was the discussion declaring them mere appendages of Barack Obama, to be styled as part of his "group" rather than as individuals in their own right? Fat&Happy (talk) 14:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Apologies F&H - my comment that a change should have been preceded by discussion should retroactively be assigned to the editor who added the template and made the initial change in article style without discussion, not really to your following it. But it should be discussed. And I'm not surprised to hear there are inconsistencies in other Obama articles regarding this and I just corrected one in the family article. As for the history of these articles, my recollection is that they were in effect offshoots of the main article as the individuals do not have independent notability - the articles were not independently conceived, and arguments have been made to keep them as part of Family of Barack Obama which itself was an offshoot of Barack Obama and to some extent Early life and career of Barack Obama. Also, they and a bunch of others are a part of WP:WikiProject Barack Obama and all subject to the ArbCom Obama article probation - we do tend to consider all Obama-related articles together. Perhaps we should ask editors involved in the other articles and the project for their opinions regarding consistency of language version across articles - I don't think this has been considered before. I also don't think this is crucial, but consistency is not a bad thing, and guidelines - while not to be slavishly followed - never hurt. Tvoz/talk 20:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Of course the problem here is that either option chosen can be defended as "consistent"; meaning either option can be equally assaulted as "inconsistent", since the underlying question is "consistent with what?". I can see applying the "strong national ties" rule either way, since as you point out Obama Sr.'s notability is due to his ties to the President of the U.S. And I'm not surprised to see inconsistencies in any article; I tend to notice date deviations more than spelling ones, but I've made corrections of both types in Newt Gingrich, Pixie Lott, the Obama conspiracy theories, and a couple of past Presidents, among others having nowhere near the ambiguity of the Obama family articles. Since the call for consistent U.S. formatting is based on the Obama relationship, I'd think the best place to resolve the question is within the Obama project. Whichever way it turns out, it would probably be a good idea to not only add the appropriate "Use" templates to the ambiguous articles – which are great for the bots – but also some sort of note to catch the attention of editors. Fat&Happy (talk) 23:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I was talking about internal consistency or inconsistency - both British and American spellings within the same article. Tvoz/talk 01:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I read it as if everything after "opinions regarding consistency of language version across articles" was all about that type of consistency. But in my "nothing surprises me" portion, I also meant internal consistency within the articles mentioned. Fat&Happy (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Right - I assume no one would argue against consistency within an article, which is what the first part of my reply referred to; the second part ("opinions regarding...") was about consistency across articles. Tvoz/talk 06:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

MOS:TIES has "An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the English of that nation." Barack Obama, Sr. is the topic of this article. He was a Kenyan who lived most of his life in that country and was regularly identified as a Kenyan implying "strong national ties" per MOS:TIES and MOS:RETAIN. Thus, it makes sense to me that this article would use British spelling and date conventions. I did not see anything on WP:MOS about maintaining consistency across a group of articles or overriding a WP:MOS convention because a person is associated with another very notable person other than through consensus among the editors. As consensus can change it seems safer to stick with and cite WP:MOS rather than reestablishing consensus each time an editor wants to use American English spelling/conventions on this article. --Marc Kupper|talk 01:13, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

← So then what to do in Family of Barack Obama where we talk about people who are American, Indonesian, Kenyan, Canadian, and even Queen Elizabeth? The only thing that makes sense is to go with American spelling because the common theme, Barack Obama, is American. And since the only reason Sr. is notable is because of Jr., the logic to me is to be consistent across articles in the set. As for consensus, we don't really have to re-establish it over and over again, we would put the {{American English}} notice here on the talk page and just point to it as a style guide. But let's see what others think. Tvoz/talk 07:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

One other point: actually Lolo Soetoro uses American spelling (as does Indonesia, by the way) - so if I'm not mistaken that would make this one the only article of the group using British spelling. Tvoz/talk 07:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Obama Sr.

Is this necessary? Shouldn't we just refer to him as "Obama" and use "Obama II" or "son of obama" or "young Obama" when referring to the president? Over on the Ann Dunham article "Obama" is used to refer to Sr. until the son is born, and then it uses "Obama Sr." for that paragraph and isn't used again (as they divorced). Afterwards "Obama" is used to refer to the son exclusively.

On an unrelated note, should we really be linking to IMDb? I mean, they list Obama has having died in 1992, when it was actually 1982. Credibility kind of takes a beating there. hbdragon88 (talk) 05:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed before - see, for example, the section "suffix usage" above - the consensus has long been that we need to clearly distinguish between the father and the son. Since obviously the reading public would more commonly refer to the president as "Obama", it makes most sense to refer to him that way here, and leave the father as Sr. The greater danger here is for readers to mistake the father for the son inadvertently or otherwise. Most instances in Ann Dunham referred to the father as Sr., and I've fixed the 2 that did not - clarity is important there as well. Finally, I removed the IMDB EL - never noticed it before, and I agree it doesn't belong here. Tvoz/talk 04:15, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

It should be clear enough that "Obama" refers to the subject of the article, not someone else named Obama. Just because there is someone more famous with the same last name doesn't mean we have to disambiguate from that person every time we refer to them in their own article. For example Albert Gore, Sr. doesn't refer to its subject as "Gore Sr." every time. Jesse Jackson, Jr. doesn't call him "Jackson Jr." unless it's necessary in a specific spot. The usage in this article is out of line with general practice and Wikipedia standards, and I fail to see why this should be treated as a special case. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I've corrected the article, and reread it a couple days later. It is clear enough that any reference to just "Obama" is talking about the subject of this article, not any other member of his family. Look at any article about a less-famous relative of a really-famous person with the same last name, and you'll see it handled the same way. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Bigamy

Why doesn't the article have any mention of the fact that Obama, Sr. was a polygamist? This information is well known. For example, in an Associated Press article dated yesterday April 29, 2011, Bob Salsberg refers to Obama, Sr.'s polygamous status when discussing some documents concerning Obama, Sr.'s immigration status. The fact that he had two wives, one in Africa and another in the United States, is a notable fact about Obama, Sr.'s life. Also, one of the two women that he was married to was Ann Dunham, the current President's mother. The fact that the current President of the United States's father was a polygamist when the President was conceived and born, and that status remained for several years later is a notable fact that needs to be mentioned in the article. Also, Obama, Sr.'s polygamist status seemed to play a role in his inability to finish his Ph.D. at Harvard University, another factor that lends to its notability. You can review the reliable source to support this widely known information here: Salsberg, Bob. "Files suggest elder Obama forced to leave Harvard" Associated Press, April 29, 2011.--Distressed (talk) 17:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

If true (the article states that he denied it) this would be bigamy, not polygamy. Bigamy is when one person gets married even though they had previously gotten married and haven't divorced their previous spouse. Polygamy is when a single marriage involves more than one person, usually a man taking several wives at once or in succession into the same marriage.--Loonymonkey (talk) 15:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter since both terms, polygamy and bigamy apply to Obama, Sr. However just for your information, bigamy is a term used to describe a crime where someone has two wives or two husbands and it is against the law. Polygamy is a broad general scientific term (not a criminal law term) that includes bigamy and other forms of polygamy. Another form of polygamy that applies to Obama, Sr. is polygyny. Polygyny is the very specific scientific term that applies to Obama, Sr. and bigamy is the criminal law term that applies to the exact same behavior of Obama, Sr. The article could refer to Obama, Sr. as a polygamist, a bigamist or polygynist, any of these terms is quite acceptable. But since you prefer the criminal law term I have edited the article to indicate that Obama, Sr. was not only a polygamist and polygynist, but he was also breaking U.S. law making him also a bigamist. I agree that bigamist is the proper term to apply to Obama, Sr. because the terms polygamist and polygynist, while correct, are too narrow to properly describe Obama, Sr. behavior and status.--Distressed (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Which of the three terms is used to describe him in the reliable source you cited, since obviously including a characterization (especially one implying illegality) without an RS would be a violation of Wikipedia policy? Fat&Happy (talk) 18:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Bigamy is a crime, and it is a term that does not appear in either the WPost story on Ann Dunham or the AZ Republic story regarding Obama Sr's withdrawal from Harvard. We have reports that Sr. told Dunham a lie about getting divorced so that is all that we reflect in the article. Drawing one's own conclusions from reliable sources, i.e. "they say he lied so that means it is bigamy!" is precisely what WP:SYNTH forbids. Tarc (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

'Was British by Nationality'

Someone has added that Obama Sr. was British by nationality, possibly in connection with that second desperate attempt to find his son was not a naturally born American (this would apply much more to the first seven presidents). I'm changing this. He was Kenyan, and Kenya gained independence in 1963, but unless we're being really legalistic he was not British by nationality before that - that would have applied to a quarter of the world at one stage otherwise, and from Idi Amin through to Gandhi at others. Wikipedia does not include this in the 'nationality' section for biographical infoboxes (or some people would have several irrelevant 'nationalities' listed just because of wars in their lifetime) - see other examples, like those above. Indeed he lived under the jurisdiction of the British, and according to a legalistic point of view he was a British 'subject' (and, therefore, a kind of 'national'), but including this is misleading. The usage of the term was legally different in the days of colonies, but even then would have not have applied to him in common parlance (and I doubt he would liked to have been described as such). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.115.103 (talk) 19:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with what 41.185.115.103 write. It's my understanding that members of the colonies could get British passports along with passports for their home countries. If you ask, they will say "I'm from Kenya, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, etc." and will show you their British passport if that's the right one for the situation. It terms of relevance to this article, Barack Obama, Sr. has always been identified as a Kenyan, and presumably self identified as such. The long form birth certificate identifies the father as being from "Kenya, East Africa." --Marc Kupper|talk 20:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Surname of children from 3rd marriage?

I see that Barack Obama Sr.'s third wife was named Ruth Nidesand and the children from that marriage go by the names Mark and David Ndesandjo. Mark and David's surname appears to be a variation of their mother's maiden name. Does anyone know (a) why they didn't use their father's surname "Obama", (b) why, if they were going to use their mother's surname, they altered it, and (c) the etymology of the variation of their mother's surname from "Nidesand" to "Ndesandjo"? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

"Atheist"

Atheism is NOT a religion. It is the absence of religion. If Barack Obama Sr. was an atheist, the infobox should say "Religion: None". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.56.187.121 (talk) 12:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

"Atheist" is a value for the variable religion equivalent to "Reason", "Science", etc., as "Agnostic" is equivalent to "None" and agnosticism is NOT equivalent to atheism but it's pointless to insist on clarity here and agree 'None' is acceptable. FWIU 'Atheist' is the correct value in this case as it wouid be for the current U.S. president's other parent as well. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

that's not correct. atheism means no religion (not agnosticism), agnosticism means don't know, either or. source needed for "variable religion" because you're just making that up.

agreed. atheism is not a religion. to the ip above, you better provide valid sources. Auss00 (talk) 01:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

the quote on the edit page says "My father was almost entirely absent from my childhood, having been divorced from my mother when I was 2 years old; in any event, although my father had been raised a Muslim, by the time he met my mother he was a confirmed atheist, thinking religion to be so much superstition}}" if he thinks religion is to be so much a superstition, then why is his religion listed at atheism? atheism is not a religion. he has no religion, so it's more accurate to say "none" with atheist in parenthesis.

i don't know why religion is listed in the box in the first place. richard dawkins and countless other atheists do not have that in their boxes. plus, it's already mentioned in obama sr's early life. Auss00 (talk) 11:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

• The present version – | religion = None (Atheist) – is correct. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 13:26, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

• This answers all the above in a concise and understandable form. There can be no confusion here. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 13:26, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

There has not been any recent debate on the infobox religion status. Also all the above discussions on this topic have not had widespread input. Therefore if anyone if "consensus" is brought up, we should at least get a new consensus on this.

Also, per the instructions on Template:Infobox person we should merely mention the persons actual religion. Not their previous beliefs or religion-of-birth. Pass a Method talk 17:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• The meaning of your first paragraph is not clear enough. Please rephrase.
• I entirely support your second statement.

-- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Childhood beliefs

I removed the art about his childhood beliefs because i think that is inappropriate. Why should we mention what beliefs he had before he was 6 and when he was 6? Since when do peole make up their spiritual or religious beliefs as children? Pass a Method talk 00:46, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

This is not just childhood beliefs, but also how he was raised. You are continuing to try to remove a very relevant part of his life. You did the same thing here. Considering that you identify as deist on your user page, this is no surprise. 173.45.110.55 (talk) 01:13, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

You have not convinced me that his childhood beliefs are relevant. Pass a Method talk 01:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

It's his biography; beliefs inculcated while he was being raised are relevant, pretty much by definition. Fat&Happy (talk) 02:19, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I do not believe that children are capable of making up their theological beliefs beliefs as children, particularly not between infancy and the age of six. If this was about his teenage years or at least between ten and twelve i might concede, but this is talking about very young childhood up to six. Pass a Method talk 08:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I restored this biographically relevant, reliably sourced, properly cited and easily verifiable sentence that I originally added on 24 May 2012:

Obama Sr. was raised in a Muslim family,^[16] but converted to Christianity and changed his name from "Baraka" to the more Christian-sounding "Barack" when he was about six years old at the insistence of the Christian missionary schools he attended.^[17]

and has subsequently been removed four times (1 2 3 4) against consensus by Pass a Method (talk | contribs).
The sentence was carefully worded to accurately follow the cited source, and is about how Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. acquired his name, and the religious environment in which he was raised at home and educated at school—not about his childhood religious beliefs. Newross (talk) 13:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree; I don't think a sufficient reason has been presented to exclude this biographical information.--Arxiloxos (talk) 14:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I also agree that this sentence is necessary, and well-stated. Tvoz/talk 14:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree as well, the sentence is supported by sources and is used to reference how he was raised more than what he believed. I strongly support inclusion of this material. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:44, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

It is well sourced and (presumably) true, so let's remove that aspect that from the discussion. What's important is the relevance and the wording. Its relevance is because some of Obama Junior's political opponents today ignorantly seem to want to believe that he is secretly a Muslim, and believe that this matters, and some of his better informed opponents are perfectly happy to unethically use and manipulate that bigotry and ignorance among the less well informed voters to achieve their political goals. So the only question on relevance is, is it our job to involve ourselves in current US Presidential politics to correct the beliefs of the ill-informed and destroy the tool of the manipulators. The religious history of the father of a Presidential candidate would definitely not be an issue if politics in the US today was less dirty, and all voters were better educated and less bigoted. As for the wording, as has already been mentioned, saying that Obama Senior "converted to Christianity...when he was about six years old" is just nonsense. Six year olds don't convert. They have no idea. They just do what their parents do, without believing much at all in an adult way. If anything must be said, say something like "was moved by his family into a Christian schooling environment when he was six years old". And exactly who thought "Barack" was more Christian sounding than "Baraka"? Those pushing and believing that Obama Junior is Muslim these days think that "Barack" sounds Muslim enough to put bigotry and ignorance ahead of truth and tolerance. Maybe back in Kenya in 1901 there was truth in the claim that "Barack" was more Christian sounding than "Baraka". That time and cultural aspect needs to be clarified. HiLo48 (talk) 16:48, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if there's any hope that any of those still editing the relevant parts of the article could actually join this discussion? I'm no expert on this topic, but when editors that do claim to know more avoid Discussion I worry about their competence and good faith as Wikipedia editors. HiLo48 (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Die Geschichte der Auma Obama

The documentary created by Barack Sr.'s daughter Auma, Die Geschichte der Auma Obama Die Geschichte der Auma Obama (translated as The Education or perhaps History of Auma Obama) needs to be added to this page as part of the intro. Tyfrazier (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I started the article here Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Die_Geschichte_der_Auma_Obama Tyfrazier (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Question of whether Barack Sr. was Assisinated

It seems there is some indication or at least question as to whether Barack Sr. was in fact assassinated, especially as accounted from his sister during the film Die Geschicte der Auma Obama and the so called car accident was not true. It certainly would not have been unheard of at that time. Has this question been raised elsewhere? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyfrazier (talk • contribs) 15:38, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

also see relationship to Tom_Mboya Tyfrazier (talk) 15:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Mboya's role in Kenya's politics and transformation is the subject of increasing interest, especially with the coming into scene of American politician Barack Obama, Jr. Obama's father, Barack Obama, Sr., was a US-educated Kenyan who benefited from Mboya's scholarship programme in the 1960s, and married during his stay there, siring the future Illinois Senator and President. Obama Sr. had seen Mboya shortly before the assassination, and testified at the ensuing trial. Obama Sr. believed he was later targeted in a hit-and-run incident as a result of this testimony.

a father's charm

Tyfrazier (talk) 15:51, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

the question of whether Barack Sr.'s car accidents were in fact directly related to his drinking should also be more thoroughly investigated Tyfrazier (talk) 16:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

This is wikipedia and not conspiracytheory.com. You would need reliable, independent sources making such claims, not conjectures by relatives. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It is a question which should be investigated further considering Mboya's assassination and Obama Sr.'s direct connection. Other than a few newspaper articles what evidence is there that the automobile accident was in fact due to drunk driving. Obama Sr. himself claimed an earlier accident was an attempt on his life, and he did testify at the assassination trial of Mboya. The film itself is far from conspiracy theory, and all evidence that Obama Sr. "drank" himself to ruin is not really supported. The film by Auma Obama documents more than the event, it also documents the life work of a man who appears to have been a significant, albeit polemic, figure in Kenyan politics. Tyfrazier (talk) 18:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not here to "investigate further" nor to report on such "investigation of" fringey claims. If an investigation by reputable sources unearths a long hidden murder conspiracy that is then covered by reliable sources, then we can discuss including it. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:58, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It's clearly stated in the Tom Mboya article that Obama Sr. believed there had been an attempt on his life, and his sister also stated the same. Tyfrazier (talk) 19:10, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It prolly shouldnt be there, either. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The IPA transcription given is the same as for the US President. However, Obama Sr is African born and likely used native pronunciation. Given that both Dholuo nor Swahili have no diphthongs, and only two of the vowels in the transcription exist in Dholuo, it is extremely unlikely that Obama Sr himself pronounced his name as it shown in this article. I have flagged. Perhaps a source specific to Obama Sr can be given. 60.240.207.146 (talk) 22:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Marriage and family

This section is confusing and incomplete, making no mention of his second wife and only alluding to a third. The information can be gleaned from other parts of the article, but it would make sense to at least summarize all of his marriages, their chronology, and the children of those marriages in this section. 160.111.254.17 (talk) 21:17, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Agree. Despite the interest in his marriages because of his son Barack Obama, it is highly unusual to have the Lead of an article devoted so much to marriages and family. I think perhaps only the marriage that produced Barack Obama should be featured in the Lead.Parkwells (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Number

Obama Senior's British passport number was 84764. It was issued in 1959, renwewed in 1964 and expired in 1969. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.219.253 (talk) 13:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The passport was issued on 29/4/1959. The actual renewal is dated in the September of 1963. This renewal was for five years, starting on 29/4/1964. The renewal seems to have been in the British Consulate in Boston, in the U.S A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.205.224 (talk) 08:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

What is the point of this thread? HiLo48 (talk) 10:54, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Obama Senior's Kenyan passport, with the number 5866, was issued in 1964. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.15.178 (talk) 11:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

What is the point of this thread? HiLo48 (talk) 03:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Wasting everybody's time. DNFT. Fat&Happy (talk) 03:43, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

In both, Obama Senior falsely claimed to have no wives or children. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.205.224 (talk) 09:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

No apparent connection between that and the earlier posts. I think we're dealing with incompetence rather than trolling. HiLo48 (talk) 11:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe. London's a fair-sized city; I suppose it's not inconceivable that there could be several unrelated incompetent British Telecom users there. Fat&Happy (talk) 23:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Whatever, one thing that's obvious is that this is nonsense. I'll ignore it for now, unless something coherent and significant appears. HiLo48 (talk) 06:04, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Imprisonment by the British

Nonetheless, this is a revelatory book, which anyone interested in modern politics will want to read, and which will certainly shape our understanding of President Obama’s strengths, weaknesses and inscrutabilities. Every few pages Maraniss offers a factual nugget that changes or enlarges the prevailing lore. For example: Obama’s Kenyan grand­father, who had five wives, was apparently not involved in Kenyan insurgencies or ever tortured by British colonialists during the Mau Mau era. (Indeed, he remained a trusted figure among white Kenyans — and although himself a convert to Islam, he sent his son to a Christian school.) Similarly: Obama’s mother was named Stanley Ann Dunham not at the perverse insistence of her father, Stanley, but because her mother was taken by the sophistication of a Bette Davis character, a woman named Stanley, in the movie “In This Our Life,” which she saw while ­pregnant.

[29] WeldNeck (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

This page is for discussing how to improve the attached article. What changes are you suggesting? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I removed the claims that he was imprisoned by the British. See the NY Times article by Fallows. WeldNeck (talk) 16:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

until historians settle on which is correct, we should include both views. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Macintyre appears to have nothing more than interviews with some of Sr's family members. Fallows has more detailed research. I dont think they both merit equal representation. WeldNeck (talk) 16:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

If Macintyre's piece is the only source providing that perspective and it is based only on what family members said, you have a point about not giving those perspectives WP:UNDUE weight. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 4 March 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) –Chase (talk / contribs) 23:17, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

---

Barack Obama, Sr. → Barack Obama Sr. – Per a recent discussion and change to WP:JR, there should be no comma before "Sr." for the reasons that are explained in the previous discussion. A technical move is required as the target page already exists as a redirect. —sroc 💬 17:18, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

• Speedy support Red Slash 18:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose per usage in sources, which is split. No reason to prefer one acceptable style over another. Dohn joe (talk) 22:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • There is at least one perfectly good reason, which is WPCONCISE Red Slash 01:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose per Dohn joe. -- Calidum 00:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose per Doe joe and Calidum. CookieMonster755 (talk) 04:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
• Support - A title with a comma before predecessor or successor abbreviation should become a redirect. Not all titles should follow American English. I don't know, but this person was Kenyan. I don't think Kenya follows an American English format. --George Ho (talk) 07:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
• Support - It's a flippin comma; how sources use it one way or another is irrelevant if it is just a typographical choice. If there's a Manual of Style guide for how such articles should be titled, then there needs to be a compelling reason to ignore that. Tarc (talk) 14:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean "oppose", Tarc? George Ho (talk) 02:18, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

• Wait – The above decision through RfC is under review. Any action should be deferred until the discussion is finalized.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 04:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. The above mentioned discussion decided that either form is acceptable, just that the commaless form is "preferred". As Loriendrew says, the exact implications of the decision are still under discsussion, and in the mean time we should not be carrying out large numbers of moves from long term stable titles when there is no policy reason to do so.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:18, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. The guideline writing wonks are getting ahead of themselves. The comma is needed, therefore the guideline is wrong. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:00, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Why did Chasewc91 close this as not moved, contrary to Wikipedia's MOS (WP:JR)? No reason was given. If this is not undone, it will be up for a move review once the review at Administrators' noticeboard is concluded. —sroc 💬 03:53, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@Sroc: On top of the majority opposers citing usage concerns, there is no basis for a move right now as JR (the primary guideline cited by supporters) is disputed. I would recommend a new RM if the changes go through, as this one took place in the middle of a debate regarding JR. I stand by my decision. –Chase (talk / contribs) 04:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I had to query it as no reason was given. Wikipedia is not a democracy and straw polls are not votes. That said, if the result here is in doubt because of the pending AN review, then why close this RM now rather than wait? —sroc 💬 05:52, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

It just seems like common sense to me that once the dispute over JR is over, (assuming the changes remain in your favor) you'll have a stronger case and the opposers will have a weaker one. At the time of closing, the opposers argued a policy-based point (COMMONNAME implications) while supporters argued a point rooted in a disputed guideline. Just start over once everything gets sorted out and the dust has had a little bit of time to settle. Cheers, –Chase (talk / contribs) 16:51, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for Comments

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Greater detail

Obama Senior was illegally married to three alleged wives at the same time in 1961. One left quickly, possibly to avoid prosecution for bigamy. In 1964, he was flung out of America. The grounds given by the INS were "no funds" and "no one could figure out how many wives he had". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.64.255 (talk) 15:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Got any reliable sources for that? or are you just repeating and enlarging on the scandalous rumors you have heard? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

See theobamafile.com/_family/SeniorImmigrationFile.htm . This mentions "as many as three wives" and "insufficient funds".

This is a tremendously unreliable source. The 'About' section on the main page of that site says enough. Cannolis (talk) 11:31, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

The INS file was originally at freerepublic.com . I see the Immigration and Nationality Service as reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.232.207 (talk) 15:52, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I should have said "Naturalization", not "Nationality". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.232.207 (talk) 15:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

The INS file is mentioned by many web-sites, mostly right-wing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.232.207 (talk) 15:27, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Got any reliable sources for that? or are you just repeating and enlarging on the scandalous rumors you have heard? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

At fault in car crashes?

The article explicitly states in the introduction that Obama "caused" three serious car accidents in the final years of his life. I have never seen a source indicating that he caused the accidents, merely that they happened. The only indication of fault I have ever seen is a note that the first crash occurred under suspicious circumstances, implying a possible assassination attempt. I do not recall the source for that claim, so it should not be in the article, but I don't think the implication of his own guilt should be included either, in the absence of any source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.70.55.1 (talk) 01:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

See www.theobamafile.com/_family/senior.htm . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.113.43 (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

This says "He killed a man and lost both legs in alcohol-related accidents and eventually killed himself behind the wheel -- hammered!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.63.85 (talk) 14:49, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

See www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-431908/A-drunk-bigot-US-Presidential-hopeful-HASNT-said-father-.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.63.85 (talk) 15:03, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

One said that Obama caused other drunken accidents, beyond the main three. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.122.239.188 (talk) 15:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Religion again

I see no reason why there is no religion listed. Every single reliable source claims him to be either Muslim or Atheist. EgraS (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

The article also mentions anglicanism. Either way, see Template talk:Infobox#RfC Religion in infoboxes--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:34, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Barack Obama, Sr.. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090817205956/http://www.eastandard.net:80/uselections/InsidePage.php?id=1143998528 to http://www.eastandard.net/uselections/InsidePage.php?id=1143998528

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 13 May 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved per WP:SNOW. (non admin closure).  InsertCleverPhraseHere  21:44, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

---

Barack Obama Sr. → Barack Obama, Sr. – The previous RM said not to omit the comma. However, the comma was removed without further discussion. Shall we still omit the comma or enforce the RM and then reinsert it? George Ho (talk) 05:12, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose – George, you are well aware that every RM since the WP:JR rewrite has re-affirmed the no-comma preference. You are just making noise here. Dicklyon (talk) 05:52, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Dicklyon, if you want to ignore the previous RM, you should have proposed it in the first place. Right now, we should build another consensus. --George Ho (talk) 06:00, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

The consensus has been built via an RFC and a huge stack of RM discussions. Nothing new here. Dicklyon (talk) 06:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

The fact that the consensus decided at RFC doesn't make the title change automatic. Also, the previous RM was totally ignored; the RFC was improperly enforced. By the way, there was one opposer in other RMs; what happened to that person. --George Ho (talk) 06:05, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Majority rules here. Have you not seen RMs that have been rejected simply because the same amount of people agree with them as do not? Plus, the point of a precedent is that it affects all other articles. Rovingrobert (talk) 06:57, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Robert, shall we build another central discussion to ignore the previous RMs and enforce MOS:JR? Therefore, there will not be a need to have another individual case. I don't like omitting commas, but I guess America is changing somehow? --George Ho (talk) 07:35, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Whatever you feel will bring more users to the discussion. Out of curiosity, do you know if there is any legal preference for comma or no comma? Rovingrobert (talk) 07:40, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

As far as I know, Robert, legally either way is fine: [30]Hart's Rules (preferred by WP:NCCAPS). But AP stylebook encourages omitting it. In other words, there is no legal way to prefer one or the other. George Ho (talk) 07:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

So what would be rationale for including the comma? I prefer to omit the comma as it looks neater, but I'm interested in your opinion. Rovingrobert (talk) 08:20, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, that depends on sources, espeicially if a person is American. Otherwise, I don't mind omitting a comma for a non-American. Then again, maybe I should check talk pages before I remove the commas. Otherwise, I'd be violating whatever previous RMs ruled, regardless of RfCs. George Ho (talk) 08:33, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Trust me, most editors would say one size fits all. You know, 'consistency' and all the rest of it. For most people there are sources giving their name either way, so that's nothing to go by. See the closing comments for Talk:Martin Luther King Jr. Day#Requested move 22 April 2016. Rovingrobert (talk) 13:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose – Consensus once, consensus for subsequent cases. This is now a technical issue, not fit for continual pasting into RMs. Rovingrobert (talk) 07:00, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose per MOS:JR and WP:CONCISE. Removing the comma is routine now and noncontroversial. George Ho, it is disruptive to keep listing conflicting RMs; some of the ones you listed are to remove the comma and some are to add it, and all of them are pointless. We already had an RfC on this, the guideline reflects the RfC, the comma-free version better agrees with the WP:CRITERIA in multiple ways, and continuing to brow-beat all RM-watching editors with this stuff is pointless and annoying. As are many of your other RM-related antics. It's time you give this entire part of the project and all its editors a rest from these continual, time-wasting busybody activities.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  08:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose per MOS:JR – No justification provided in this case for deviating from the guidelines. RGloucester — ☎ 13:28, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - not even an attempt to make the required case for the comma. The previous RM said not to omit the comma. - and it predated the new community consensus and guideline. We don't need this kind of RM. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:39, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
• Strong oppose precisely no per WP:MOSJR. ApprenticeFan ^work 04:01, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose per MOS:JR policy. Let's not start more RM talk page fiasco parties CookieMonster755 ^{📞 ✉ ✓} 07:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Archive 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Barack Obama Sr.. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100610025012/http://www.anthropology.hawaii.edu/News/Announcements/Dunham/dunham.html to http://www.anthropology.hawaii.edu/News/Announcements/Dunham/dunham.html

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) 13:35, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Barack Obama Sr.. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101215034236/http://www.economics.hawaii.edu:80/news/news-09.html to http://www.economics.hawaii.edu/news/news-09.html#obamaconnection

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) 18:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Barack Obama Sr.. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318075234/http://podfuse-dl.andomedia.com/800185/podfuse-origin.andomedia.com/citadel_origin/pods/WABC/WABC-Batchelor/jbs_091611a.mp3 to http://podfuse-dl.andomedia.com/800185/podfuse-origin.andomedia.com/citadel_origin/pods/WABC/WABC-Batchelor/jbs_091611a.mp3
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100528020630/http://www.northwestern.edu/african-studies/docs/working-papers/wp8bade.pdf to http://www.northwestern.edu/african-studies/docs/working-papers/wp8bade.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jun/06/barackobama.uselections2008
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0%2C8599%2C1729524%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.economics.hawaii.edu/news/news-09.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716164203/http://jobs.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/familytree/545467%2CBSX-News-wotreev09.stng to http://jobs.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/familytree/545467%2CBSX-News-wotreev09.stng
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091212100047/http://www.necn.com/Boston/Arts-Entertainment/2009/12/06/Kennedy-Center-honoree/1260145664.html to http://www.necn.com/Boston/Arts-Entertainment/2009/12/06/Kennedy-Center-honoree/1260145664.html

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) 20:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)