This is an archive of past discussions about Jimmy Carter. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The image in the infobox was taken 40 years ago. Surely it should be updated to a more recent photo, at least from this side of the century? Commons has some recent portraits of him. NixinovaTC05:54, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
All presidential infoboxes have the official portraits as the image, taken during their time in office, it has become standard. maybe you should call for RFC. Lochglasgowstrathyre (talk) 18:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Should the frequent false reports of his death be mentioned?
I frequently see posts on Yahoo Answers saying that he has recently died. Easily several times a year, maybe more often, there is a rash of these.
I don't think it's really notable, at least not in this article (it might be more notable in the article on Yahoo Answers as an example of its lack of reliability).
But I think that it should be mentioned anyway, because when someone sees a report of his death and comes to Wikipedia (either to add a date or death to the article or just to read about the person), they should see that it isn't true.
If there are reliable sources that discuss this in sufficient depth, then maybe it belongs here. Otherwise, no. It should indeed serve to demonstrate that Yahoo Answers is unreliable. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:15, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Too Much of our Article's Material on Human Rights is Sunday School and Goody Two-Shoes
For example, the first two times we include this phrase:
" . . to promote and expand human rights."
" . . establish a Georgia Human Rights Council that would work toward solving issues within the state ahead of any potential violence."
In fact, I remember arguments, especially regarding foreign policy. Some people said if the U.S. focused too centrally on human rights, it would make us flat and predictable, and therefore playable. Others said, to the contrary, getting out in front on something as central makes us much more effectively a world leader (stating both views from U.S. perspective).
The only place I see where we address some of the controversy is in our Criticism of American policy sub-section:
"In 1984, Carter stated he had been wrongly presented as weak by Reagan due to a commitment to human rights during the previous presidential election, . . . "
East Timor, and broader context being squarely within our wheelhouse here at Wiki
In fact, I'd say that, next to accuracy and a variety of good references, broader context is one of the defining characteristics of an encyclopedia. On that alone, I'd say the reasons why Indonesia invaded East Timor a scant one year and two months before Carter took office are relevant. Furthermore, since one of their reasons was to take the place of South Vietnam as the major regional ally of the United States, and especially since the Carter Administration largely accepted them as a regional ally, I'd say this one is highly relevant.
The two other reasons were to (1) avoid the "negative example" of an independent nation (East Timor was a former Portuguese colony within the archipelago of islands, most of which were and are Indonesia), and (2) the initial estimates of large amounts of oil and natural gas under the Timor Sea, which in fact turned out to be excessive estimates.
The Specter of Genocide: Mass Murder in Historical Perspective, edited by Robert Gellately and Ben Kiernan, Cambridge University Pres, 2003, Ch. 8 "Encirclement and Annihilation": The Indonesian Occupation of East Timor, John G. Taylor, pages 174-75.
A broader context is not needed here, as this is not an article about Indonesia. The details you wish to add are peripheral in this biographical article focused on major and informative events in the life of Jimmy Carter. Drdpw (talk) 19:52, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
FriendlyRiverOtter, like Drdpw said, the broader context is not needed here. This isn't an article about Indonesia. Stating that the Carter administration supported Indonesia in spite of its invasion into East Timor is sufficient. The other detail is a WP:COATRACK. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
But if we happen to come across a reference which talks about why Carter made an exception to his human rights policy in this particular case, that would change things, right? I don't have such a reference at this time, but I do try to stay open to new quality references, as I'm sure we all do. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 17:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
East Timor, and three references within broad sweet spot, right?
A member deleted months-old material on Oct. 24. And when I added back most of it on Oct. 25, another member confirmed the deletion. And I myself favor short and sweet, too.
However, I do have doubts about going from three references down to just one. The two we've deleted are:
"The American A-4 bomber was, along with the British Hawk, central to the saturation bombing campaigns of 1978-9. . . .
"In fiscal year 1980, Indonesia received substantial US aid. It was one of six countries admitted to be violating human rights but whose aid was justified under statutory language which allowed aid which would 'directly benefit the needy people . . .'."
Indeed, and I have added the Dumbrell book citation along with one from an issue of of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists to the section. Drdpw (talk) 00:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
We can click on the specific ISBN and it takes us to a page with that number in a search box. We can click again, but we don't really go anywhere.
In general, I think we should limit the number of clickable bluebirds in a reference to a single useful one, or maybe, maybe two if the second is highly useful. So, yes, we should probably lose this ISBN (which is searchable in multiple places in the rare event a reader needs something beyond title, author, publisher, date, and page numbers like we have here). FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 17:35, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
@FriendlyRiverOtter: It kinda tells you want the quote is, so I think it might be fine. Either way, I do support what you're trying to do here with the East Timor stuff. The current section reads like a condemnation of Carter's policy there with no context whatsoever. –MJL‐Talk‐☖17:50, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
From the Wikipedia:ISBN page, I also see "This Wikipedia page needs to be updated. In particular: in light of the March 2017 RfC, . . " Okay, @Drdpw:, if you, or any of our fellow members for that matter, can explain how a highlighted ISBN delivers value for the majority of our readers, well, I am all ears. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 17:32, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
@FriendlyRiverOtter: As this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jimmy Carter article and not broader topics such as this, please take this discussion to that talk page or to another more apropos place. Thanks. Drdpw (talk) 17:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Myth propagation: "an association with the US Navy's fledgling nuclear submarine program"
A sentence in this article works to propagate the myth that President Carter was in the U.S. Navy's nuclear submarine program. He was not.
Carter had a 3-month TEMDU (temporary duty) assignment to Naval Reactors in Washington D.C. (I'm sure any number of secretaries did as well). He briefly attended the Navy's Nuclear Power School, then dropped out upon his father's death.
Those are the facts...and that's it as regards any "association" with the U.S. Navy nuclear submarine program. In other words, there wasn't any. None.
Serving aboard diesel submarines and working at a Canadian meltdown have zilch to do with the nuclear submarine program. Rickover brought very, very few officers from the diesel boat world (read: culture) over to the nuclear-powered boats...and, historically, Carter was not one of them.
Their is good reason why my information concerning Jimmy Carter should be sufficient. One being that a UTI is not trivial but important. If the case is that my paragraph about a UTI that I published is not notable enough, than Jimmy Carter Falling should not be acceptable in that section either. For falling and a UTI is very notable and both if left untreated can lead to death.BigRed606 (talk) 05:23, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
The earliest-serving of the five living U.S. presidents
Carter was not, as Clinton and Obama began their presidencies in their 40's, while Carter was inaugurated at age 52. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.76.193 (talk) 22:24, January 15, 2020 (UTC)
"Earliest" does not mean "youngest". Carter was sworn in in 1977, which is earlier than Clinton (1993) and Obama (2009). – Muboshgu (talk) 04:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2020
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aasim23:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2020
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Clarification
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Just a suggested edit to perhaps note Jimmy Carter didn't actually serve in WW2, he was (technically) in the Navy as he was a member of the Naval Academy starting in 1943 (during the war) but didn't graduate until 1946 (after the war). Thanks!
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. I didn't find a location in the article that says he served in the war, only that he was awarded the World War II Victory Medal. The article on that medal states that there are service members who received the medal despite not being a veteran of World War II. —KuyaBriBriTalk16:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2020
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Add "On March 22, 2019, Jimmy Carter became the longest living US president at 94 years, 172 days old surpassing George H.W. Bush", in the longetivity section. JayGatsby0 (talk) 12:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
This is already in the article. "...on March 22, 2019, he gained the distinction of being the nation's longest-lived president, when he surpassed the lifespan of George H. W. Bush, who was 94 years, 171 days of age when he died in November 2018..." ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 12:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
If possible, find a source that says he actually did vote in the 2016 general election and for whom, and add a proper citation to it at the end of
In the Democratic primary, Carter voted for Senator Bernie Sanders,[347] and in the general election, voted for Hillary Clinton.[348]
Otherwise,
change
In the Democratic primary, Carter voted for Senator Bernie Sanders,[347] and in the general election, voted for Hillary Clinton.[348]
to
In the Democratic primary, Carter voted for Senator Bernie Sanders,[347] and said that in the general election he would vote for Hillary Clinton.[348]
because the citation (348) is from August 2016, when he had not yet voted in the general election, which wasn't held until November. He could have changed his mind and either not voted for voted for a different candidate, or an emergency could have prevented him from voting at all. The current text is not supported by the citation given, which doesn't say that he did vote in the general election or for whom. 47.139.41.227 (talk) 21:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Carter's years at the Naval Academy from 1943-1946 are not included in cumulative years of service for military personnel. His years spent within the inactive reserve are also not included in cumulative years of service. Furthermore, the biography incorrectly states he served in the Navy Reserve from 1953-1961.
This section needs to be updated to read: "Years of service- 1946-1953". This includes the time period between his commissioning and release from active duty.
I took the initiative to correct President Carter’s naval service. I used your information that you provided here on JC’s Talk page. I don’t have a military background like you seem to have. So I didn’t know before I read the read your information that years in the Naval Academy don’t count as years of service. I thought his years of Naval Service should be corrected to reflect his actual years of service. I hope you don’t mind me using the information you provided here. NapoleonX (talk) 05:00, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Years of marriage update
The Carters celebrated their 74th wedding anniversary in July 2020, making them the longest-wed presidential couple. Lacicero (talk) 19:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
I assume you're talking about the infobox image? When multiple images of a person are available, it's quite reasonable to use a picture from when the person was most prominent — for any US president, this will be a picture from when he was president. Nyttend (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Honors & awards
Why does the section close with "In 1991, he was made an honorary member of Phi Beta Kappa at Kansas State University." yet not include his many honorary degrees, including Oxford? Seems those would be a lot more important and the KSU thing is here because a KSU fan inserted it? Tempted to revise. --2603:7000:2145:5400:BD90:3BC5:FFA4:2CD6 (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
There is a link to the city of Salisbury, now known as Harare in that section. Right now, it links to the English city of Salisbury. The link should be changed so it links to the Zimbabwean city.
The article currently says Earl Carter died a relatively wealthy man, having recently been elected to the Georgia House of Representatives. As phrased, being elected caused him to be relatively wealthy. Now, I can't speak to the pay in 1953, but in 2021 the Georgia state reps make under $18,000/year. Half a year's pay would not make one a relatively wealthy man. Unless the sources cite this as the source of his wealth (and I don't have the sources to check), we should rephrase this. "Half a year into his term as a member of the Georgia House of Representatives, Earl Carter died in relative wealth.", perhaps. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Edit request
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
To expand on my revert, I believe that attempting to list Operation Cyclone more prominently than any other policy pursued by the Carter administration is slightly WP:UNDUE. In particular, the bit about it being the CIA's single most expensive operation is out-of-place here because the vast expansion of the program under Carter's successors, Reagan and George H.W. Bush, could hardly have been foreseen during Carter's tenure in office. Reliable sources are clear that the actions approved by Carter in 1979 and 1980 to counter Soviet activity in Afghanistan were cautious, limited in scope, and further restrained by a desire to protect Pakistan from Soviet retaliation and to preserve plausible deniability—concerns that had all but evaporated by the middle of the 1980s. Without going into excessive granular detail, two sources that help to illustrate this point are listed below:
In any event, policymakers back in Washington did not believe the Soviets could be defeated militarily by the rebels. The CIA's mission was spelled out in an amended Top Secret presidential finding signed by President Carter in late December 1979 and reauthorized by President Reagan in 1981. The finding permitted the CIA to ship weapons secretly to the mujahedin. The document used the word harassment to describe the CIA's goals against Soviet forces. The CIA's covert action was to raise the cost of Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. It might also deter the Soviets from undertaking other Third World invasions. But this was not a war the CIA expected to win outright on the battlefield. The finding made clear that the agency was to work through Pakistan and defer to Pakistani priorities. The CIA's Afghan program would not be "unilateral," as the agency called operations it ran in secret on its own. Instead the CIA would emphasize "liaison" with Pakistani intelligence. The first guns shipped in were single-shot, bolt-action .303 Lee Enfield rifles, a standard British infantry weapon until the 1950s. With its heavy wooden stock and antique design, it was not an especially exciting weapon, but it was accurate and powerful.—Source: Coll, Steve (2004). Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. Penguin Group. p. 58. ISBN9781594200076.
Charles Cogan: There were no lethal provisions given to the Afghans before the Soviet invasion. There was a little propaganda, communication assistance, and so on at the instigation of the [Pakistani] ISI. But after the Soviet invasion, everything changed. The first weapons for the Afghans arrived in Pakistan on the tenth of January [1980], fourteen days after the invasion. Shortly after the invasion, we got into the discussions with the Saudis that you just mentioned. And then when [William J.] Casey became DCI under Reagan at the beginning of 1981, the price tag went through the ceiling.—Source: Blight, James G.; et al. (2012). Becoming Enemies: U.S.-Iran Relations and the Iran-Iraq War, 1979-1988. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 66. ISBN978-1-4422-0830-8.
Again, while the program drastically expanded under Carter's Republican successors to include things like the (in)famous provision of Stinger missiles to Afghan guerrillas and even "sabotage and propaganda operations inside Soviet Central Asia" (Coll p. 90), none of that was necessarily envisaged by Carter. Without those subsequent modifications, the inception of Operation Cyclone itself might seem far less significant in retrospect.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 07:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2021
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Please remove
Carter was also weakened by a signing of bill that contained many of the "hit list" projects.
and add
Carter was also weakened by signing a bill that contained many of the "hit list" projects.
I would like to suggest the section on personal life be reversed. The family section should be first, and the sentences on home building and Elvis Presley should come at the end. His marriage and children are far more important than a brief acquaintance with Elvis, and perhaps the whole section on Elvis Presley should be cut.Princetoniac (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
In the section on the 1976 Democratic Primary, the article states that "As late as January 26, 1976, Carter was the first choice of only four percent of Democratic voters" and then cites a Gallup poll without actually providing said Gallup poll. Is there anywhere in which said poll (and evidence to support the January 26 statement) could be found?ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 21:05, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
GA Review
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I just saw Jimmy Carter listed as a Good article nominee awaiting review, and I knew I had to review this. This is a highly important article, and has the potential to be a GA. Considering the length of the article, my goal is to complete this review in the next 7-10 days. My general comments about the article would be divided by section, and other suggestions would be separated from the review. Feel free to let me know if you have any concerns. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Just a procedural note that the nominator is not a "significant contributor" to the article. The instructions say that "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination." I don't see any note on the talk page, but anyways, the instructions also say that "Anyone may nominate an article". – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
GA criteria
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
A major issue I see with the referencing is that various books which are used in the prose as references are used as short references, as well as using {{cite book}} template (Ex. Ref 212, Ref 381, etc.) Also, the books are mentioned in "Further reading" section (Ex. "Jimmy Carter: A Comprehensive Biography From Plains to Post-Presidency", "Zelizer, Julian (2010). Jimmy Carter, etc.). Works in the "Further reading" section should only consist of those which are not used as citations in the prose.
@ExcellentWheatFarmer – I should add that some citations like "Frum, p. 292" doesn't seem to refer to any book. Moreover, we should be using various more "reliable" scholarly studies, particularly in the presidency section. Various books in the "Further reading" section should be moved to "Primary sources", and should be incorporated in the prose. Various citations citing The American Presidency Project's interview transcripts are fine, but are not too good. Currently, this seems a major issue, particularly for an article of a living American president, attempting to be a GA. Hopefully you can fix that. Rest, progress seems fine. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:08, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Sure, I'll take at-least 2-3 more days to complete the prose review. We;ll still have images, sources, and other MOS things to check. We have a lot of books/scholarly research to consider, which could surely be done after fixing up the formatting issues. There's no time limit. Thanks for your co-operation so far. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Various sources lack the url access date, or the publishing agency/news agency, etc.
@ExcellentWheatFarmer – While reading the "Post-presidency (1981–present)", I realized that it would be better to re-write that section, as it has quite a few issues. The "Diplomacy" sub-section needs to be in chronological order. It first mentions about 1994, then skips back to 1984, the 2001, 1986, 2002... It also has various 1-2 line paragraphs. The "Criticism of American policy" sub-section should probably be re-named, something similar to "views on successors". The "Views on Trump administration" sub-section is quite long, maybe due to Recentism. Moreover, the entire Post presidency section is huge. I know that Carter's post presidency is the longest, but I'll suggest to largely summarize this section to make it more concise. I'll hold off the review of this particular section. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
@Kavyansh.Singh – So, I just got started on this. I rearranged the prose to be as chronological as it possibly could, given the sheer volume of it present, but due to the disparity between both year and the country there's a lot of mini-paragraphs. Would you suggest merging some of them together, or would it be better to just straight up delete some of the less important stuff? – ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 17:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Ref 3 – It doesn't seems to be reliable, as firstly it is likely a self published source. WP:SELFPUBLISH states "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.", and this is an article about a living person. Secondly, the website itself states "The following material on the first fourteen generations of the ancestry of John Kerry should not be considered either exhaustive or definitive, but rather as a first draft"
Removed the erroneous source and the sentence connected to it.
"during Carter Jr.'s infancy" – I guess, writing him as "Jimmy" or just "Carter" would suffice.
Done.
"Carter got along well with his parents, although his mother worked long hours and was often absent in his childhood." – How are the two parts related? Even if they are, rephrase to remove "although".
Rephrased it to "Carter got along well with both of his parents, despite his mother often being absent in his childhood due to working long hours."
"Although Earl was staunchly pro-segregation, he allowed his son to befriend the black farmhands' children." – Presumably, "Earl" means Jimmy's father. If so, rephrase as "Although Carter's father was staunchly pro-segregation, he allowed him to befriend the black farmhands' children."
Done.
"He was the eldest son of Bessie Lillian (née Gordy) ..... cotton farmers in Georgia." – uncited
Done.
Education
"Carter attended Plains High School" → "Carter attended the Plains High School"
Done.
"and Earl took a position as a community leader." Similar to previous point about "Earl"
Done.
"Plains High School basketball team; he also joined the Future Farmers of America and developed a lifelong interest in woodworking" → "Plains High School basketball team, and also joined a youth organization named the Future Farmers of America, which helped him develop a lifelong interest in woodworking"
Done.
Fix the disambiguation link to New York in the sentence "From 1946 to 1953, Carter and Rosalynn lived in Virginia, Hawaii, Connecticut, New York and .."
Done.
Naval career
All the text from "Carter had long dreamed of attending .... was commissioned as an ensign." should probably be merged to the "Education" subsection. What are your views?
I agree, it's more to do with education that his time in the Navy so it would fit a lot better there.
"Virginia, Hawaii, Connecticut, New York and California," – link the first instances of all the states
" then led by Captain – do you mean "led by then Captain"?
It was meant to be "led then by Captain"
"In 1952, Carter began an association with the Navy's fledgling nuclear submarine program, then led by Captain Hyman G. Rickover. Rickover's demands on his men and machines were legendary, and Carter later said that, next to his parents, Rickover was the greatest influence on his life." – please see MOS:PEACOCK, and remove the peacock term. Also, rephrase the second part of the sentence as ", and Carter later said that, next to his parents, Rickover had the greatest influence on his life."
Rephrased to "Rickover had high standards and demands for his men and machines". Done.
Link NRX, and add comma before resulting in "partial meltdown resulting"
Possibly mention that his father died by pancreatic cancer.
Done.
"Deciding to leave Schenectady proved difficult." – Why was it difficult?
Done.
Ref 21 is merely a link. Please format it as a citation
Done.
Farming
Probably link Agribusiness. It's not usual/everyday term...
" The transition from Navy to agribusinessman was difficult because his first-year harvest failed due to a drought; Carter was compelled to open several bank lines of credit to keep the farm afloat." – split in two sentences, removing the semi colon.
No more issues here!
Done.
Early political career (1963–1971)
Georgia state senator (1963–1967)
Be consistent in including the Publishing location for books.
"join them—but" – Replace the dash with a comma.
Done.
"prominent member of the community and the Baptist Church" – which community?
Done.
"The initial results showed Carter losing, but this was the result of fraudulent voting orchestrated by Joe Hurst, the Democratic Party chairman in Quitman County, with the aid of the Quitman County sheriff." → "Early counting of the ballots showed Carter trailing to <name of his opponent>, but this was the result of fraudulent voting orchestrated by Joe Hurst – chairman of the Democratic Party in Quitman County, with the aid of the Quitman County sheriff."
Done.
"Carter challenged the results; when fraud was confirmed, a new election was held, which he won." → "Carter challenged the election result, which was confirmed fraudulent in an investigation. Following this, another election was held, which was won by Carter." – Also add further details like his opponent, his margin of victory, and his political affiliation
Done.
"against a change to the Georgia Constitution" – amendment?
Done.
"At the time of President Kennedy's assassination, Carter was informed by a customer of his peanut business of the killing, prompting Carter to remove himself from work and sit alone." – rephrase and split into two sentences.
Maybe merge those three short paras (from "Carter was a diligent legislator .... to he announced his run for Congress.") to form a longer one.
Done.
"When Bo Callaway was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in November 1964 ..." → "In November 1964, when Bo Callaway was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, ..."
"For a time in the State Senate," → "For some time in the State Senate,"
Done.
"The last day of the term" → "On the last day of the term"
Done.
1966 and 1970 campaigns for governor
" Callaway had just switched from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party in 1964" – We already know that he had switched parties, as it is mentioned in the previous subsection. ", and was a very strong candidate, despite being the first Republican to run for Governor of Georgia since 1876." – Why was he a strong candidate? And why did no other Republican ran for the governor of Georgia since 1876.
Done.
"since Reconstruction." – "since the reconstruction era."
Done,
"Carter decided to run for governor himself. In the Democratic primary he ran against the liberal former governor Ellis Arnall and the conservative segregationist Lester Maddox." → "Carter decided to run for the governor, and ran against liberal former governor Ellis Arnall and the conservative segregationist Lester Maddox in the Democratic primary."
Done.
" In a press conference he described" – comma after conference
Done.
"Carter returned to his agriculture business and, during" – "Carter returned to his agriculture business, and during"
Done.
" Inspired by his sister Ruth and liberal theologians" – "Liberal" is linked, however it isn't its first instance in the prose. "Carter leaned more conservative than before" – same issue with "conservative" linked here.
Done.
"himself Born again" – un-capitalize 'B'
Done.
"liberal former governor, Carl Sanders" – Remove the comma
Done.
"49 to 38 percent" – 49 percent to 38 percent
Done.
Governor of Georgia (1971–1975)
"He declared in his inaugural speech that" → "In his inaugural speech, he declared that"
"became lieutenant governor" → "was elected as the lieutenant governor"
Done.
"Richard Russell Jr., then President pro tempore of the United States Senate, died in office during Carter's second week in office; the newly inaugurated governor appointed David H. Gambrell, state Democratic Party chair, to fill Russell's unexpired term in the Senate a week after Russell's death on February 1." – (a) Mention that Richard Russell was a senator from Georgia (b) un-capitalize 'P' in 'President pro tempore' (c) Split into two sentences (d) Replace "the newly inaugurated governor" with "Carter"
Done.
"Carter was reluctant to engage in back-slapping and political favors, and the legislature found him frustrating to work with" – needs to be rephrased to avoid that awkward comma before another 'and'
Done.
"Therefore, he negotiated" – Remove 'Therefore'
Done.
"Judicial Selection Commission" – un-capitalize all
"The reorganization plan was submitted in January 1972, but had a cool reception in the legislature. But after two weeks of negotiations, it was passed at midnight on the last day of the session." → "The reorganization plan was submitted in January 1972, initially having a cool reception in the legislature. But after two weeks of negotiations, the bill was passed at midnight on last day of the session."
"In an April 3, 1971, televised appearance, Carter was asked if he was in favor of a requirement that candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor of Georgia would have to run on the same ticket. He replied, "I've never really thought we needed a lieutenant governor in Georgia. The lieutenant governor is part of the executive branch of government and I've always felt—ever since I was in the state Senate—that the executive branches should be separate."" "In a televised appearance in April, 1971, when asked if he was in favor of candidates for governor and lieutenant governor of Georgia running on the same ticket, Carter replied "I've never really thought we needed a lieutenant governor in Georgia. The lieutenant governor is part of the executive branch of government and I've always felt—ever since I was in the state Senate—that the executive branches should be separate.""
Done.
Ref#55 – It links to the main page of the newspapers. Google news citations should link to particular news articles. Same with Ref#56
Unsure on how to do this. Would you just substitute the printsec=frontpage part with printsec=secondpage and so on?
For linking a particular news article on Google news, click on the "Link to article" option on the right side.
"Carter requested the state legislature provide funding for an Early Childhood Development Program" → "Carter requested the state legislature to provide funding for an early childhood development program"
Done.
"48 million in pay" – Use Template:Inflation, and write it as "48 million (equivalent to $349,632,458 in 2023) in pay"
Done.
"Latin and South America" – Link both
Done.
"Carter stated that he had met with President of Brazil Emílio Garrastazu Médici and had been compared by some to the late President Kennedy." – Per MOS:JOBTITLE, change "met with President of Brazil Emílio Garrastazu Médici" to "met with Emílio Garrastazu Médici, the president of Brazil". Check the citation, and explain who was compared with JFK?
Did the first part, but I can't see anything in the citation about him being compared to JFK — mainly due to how small and grainy everything is. I can look for something on it elsewhere or just remove it entirely?
"with Governor of Florida Reubin Askew" – Apply MOS:JOBTITLE and rephrase as either "Reubin Askew, the governor of Florida" or "Governor Reubin Askew of Florida"
Done.
"Carter stated he favored" → "Carter stated that he favored"
Done.
Ref#67 needs a page count.
Done.
Put Ref#68 at the end of the sentence.
Done.
National ambition
"Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson" – Just Henry M. Jackson would work
Nope, you've done a great job here so far. Thanks for being so attentive to the review. I hope I've been just as satisfactory, given that I wasn't a significant contributor to the article prior to the review. – ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 10:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
"for President of the United States on " – no need to capitalize the office
Done.
Change the link in Ref#77 to this for highlighting the particular news article.
Done.
Jimmy Carter's campaign button announcing his campaign with the slogan, "My name is Jimmy Carter and I'm running for President." When mentioning about "name recognition", it should be mentioned that Carter's opponents mocked his candidacy by saying "Jimmy, who?", for him being relatively unknown outside Georgia. Source In response, Carter began saying "My name is Jimmy Carter, and I'm running for president." Source There's even a campaign button with the popular quote written. See if you can incorporate all this somewhere.
Done.
"However, "by mid-March 1976 Carter was not only far ahead of the active contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, he also led President Ford by a few percentage points," according to Shoup" – Perhaps, the sentence should begin with 'According to Shoup'. And we never had introduction to this individual (Shoup), and we don't know why his opinion matters?
Removed the quotation marks and mention of Shoup - he's referred to later in the article.
"Carter published Why Not the Best? in June 1976 to help introduce himself to the American public" → "Carter published a book/memoir/autobiography/etc. titled Why Not the Best? in June 1976 to help introduce himself to the American public"
Done.
Ref#81 doesn't cite the whole para. We need some other citations there.
"He used a two-prong strategy: in the South, which most had tacitly conceded to Alabama's George Wallace, Carter ran as a moderate favorite son." – Firstly, most readers wouldn't already be familiar with 'two-prong strategy' or 'favorite son'. Secondly, we need to mention that Wallace was a candidate, before saying that Carter competed him. Probably mention that excluding Carter, there were 16 major candidates for Democratic nomination. Source
Done.
" by building the largest single bloc." – Not sure what it means.
Replaced bloc with "support base", which I'm assuming is what was intended.
"The national news media discovered and promoted Carter, as Lawrence Shoup noted in his 1980 book The Carter Presidency and Beyond:" – He should be introduced in his first instance. Also, the sentence should be rephrased, and "As Lawrence Shoup noted in his 1980 book The Carter Presidency and Beyond" should come first.
Done.
The quote "What Carter had ........... in the short space of 9 months. should be under quotes (" ")
Done.
"During his presidential campaign in April 1976, Carter responded to an interviewer and said, "I have nothing against a community that is ... trying to maintain the ethnic purity of their neighborhoods."" → "During an interview in April 1976, Carter said, "I have nothing against a community that is ... trying to maintain the ethnic purity of their neighborhoods.""
Done.
"Minnesota Senator Walter F. Mondale " – Implement MOS:JOBTITLE
Done.
"He attacked Washington in his speeches" – Of course he didn't directly attacked Washington, D.C. in his speeches, but criticized the politicians closely related to Washington, D.C. Better to say, he benefited from being a "Washington, D.C. outsider"
Done.
"Carter and Gerald Ford faced off" – I guess, it was not mentioned before who Ford was? Mention that he was the incumbent Republican president seeking re-election.
"Carter won the popular vote ...... non-incumbent since Dwight Eisenhower." – Currently uncited, but it wouldn't be difficult to fine a relaible source.
The percentage of the popular vote seems to be in the the Toledo Blade newspaper sourced earlier in the paragraph. Would it be acceptable to move it forward?
Fine, but "yet Carter won with the largest percentage of the popular vote (50.1 percent) of any non-incumbent since Dwight Eisenhower." – needs a source
Some minor issues about the structure need to be addressed.
Firstly, the "Transition" is more sort of part of his 1976 presidential campaign than his presidency. Move the entire "Transition" subsection to his presidential campaign. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Done.
Secondly, the first two paragraphs in the Presidency section ("Carter's tenure was a ...... losing the 1980 election to Ronald Reagan") are possibly summary of his entire presidency. If that's the case, we should add more details about his inauguration and his policies. I'll suggest to add details about his inauguration in the first paragraph, and keep everything else in the second one.
Half-done? I added the date of the inauguration and split it into three paragraphs. Could still probably add in some more detail later.
Use citation templates like {{cite web}} for Ref#135 and 136.
Done.
Relations with Congress
"Carter noted the liberal wing of the Democratic Party was the most ardently against his policies, attributing this to Ted Kennedy's wanting the presidency" → "Carter noted that the liberal wing of the Democratic Party was most ardently against his policies, attributing this to Ted Kennedy's wanting the presidency" And by "Ted Kennedy's wanting the presidency", was he referring to Ted Kennedy 1980 presidential campaign?
Presumably, yes. Changed it to that.
"once more, Speaker of the House of Representatives Tip O'Neill " – Implement MOS:JOBTITLE and add 'with' before 'Speaker'
Done.
"many of the "hit list" projects" – hit list??
Reworded.
"In a June 23, 1977 address to a fundraising dinner for the Democratic National Committee, " → "In an address to a fundraising dinner for the Democratic National Committee on June 23, 1977,"
Done.
" individual Members of Congress" – uncapitalize
Done.
We need to have some more citations from reliable sources, including various expert studies about his presidency. For instance, Ref#147 doesn't cite the entire half paragraph.
Added another reliable source for that section. Will try and add more to the section as a whole later.
"by House Republicans who " – comma after Republicans
Done.
"At the start of a July 25, 1979, news conference," – news conference should be before mentioning the date
Done.
Economy
What book/journal does Ref#152 seem to refer?
Replaced all the Frum refs with a bourne one, since it's unclear as to who Frum is in the first place.
Ref#154 doesn't directly cite "creation of millions of new jobs"
Ref#155 lacks source date "SEPTEMBER 26, 2019", and doesn't seem to cite "real median household income growth by 5%"
Both the above references link to a page that doesn't seem to cite either of them. Trying to find a proper academic source for it.
Removed the sentence about millions of jobs (I looked through almost all the sources and couldn't find anything) and found something for median household growth.
" Federal Reserve Board Chairman G. William Miller" – Implement MOS:JOBTITLE
Done.
President Carter with a "random governor". Mention that Clinton later became the president.For this image (File:Bill Clinton 1978.jpg), mention in the caption that Clinton later became the president.
Done.
Deregulation
"In 1977, Carter appointed Alfred E. Kahn to lead the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB). " – Link Civil Aeronautics Board, and remove it from "See also" template.
Done.
'think tanks' – Single quotes......?
Done.
Ref#159 and Ref#160 possibly needs a page number
" The Act did not remove or diminish the FAA's regulatory powers" – Possibly this is first instance of FAA. Mention it as Federal Aviation Administration
Done.
"of Prohibition in the United States" – un-capitalize 'P'
Done,
"This Carter deregulation" – Remove "Carter"
Done.
Healthcare
"and Medicare and Medicaid being" – uncapitalize
Done.
"President Harry Truman" – Harry S. Truman
Done.
"and later defeated in the House" – Perhaps, "but later defeated in the House"
Done.
"During 1978" – "in 1978"
Done.
Ref#171 – Inconsistent with rest of the article. Cite as a short footnote.
Done.
Education
"with Congress" → "with the congress"
Done.
"In a February 28, 1978, address at the White House, Carter argued" → "In an address from the White House on February 28, 1978, Carter argued"
Done.
""Education is far too important a ......" – un-capitalize 'E' in 'Education', even if it is under direct quotation
Done.
"various Government departments" – un-capitalize 'G'
Done.
"On October 17, 1979, " – No need to repeat the year. Just mention it as "On October 17 the same year,"
Please expand this section, consisting of only a quote. And not sure how the image with Argentina president is relevant here?
Expanded it with a condensed version of Foreign policy of the Jimmy Carter administration#Camp David Accords. As for the picture, it was under the ===Foreign Policy=== subheading, so it was probably meant to represent the section as a whole. I replaced it with a picture of the three leaders involved in the Camp David accords.
Africa
"In an October 4, 1977 address to African officials at the United Nations" → "In an address to the African officials at the United Nations on October 4, 1977,"
Done.
"At a news conference later that month, Carter outlined the U.S. wanting "to work harmoniously with ...." – Needs to be rephrased.
Done.
" Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom" – Implement MOS:JOBTITLE
Done.
" Prime Minister of Zimbabwe Rhodesia" – un-capitalize PM
Done.
The sentence "The elections of ..... toward South Africa. seems to be incomplete.
Done.
"Secretary of State Vance" – Never mentioned before, link him
Done.
The two quotes in this section are from The New York Times. Rather than directly quoting, it would be better to summarize it without quotes.
Done.
For further sections, I suggest to merge "Iran" with "Iran hostage crisis", and add some more details there, as Hostage crisis was an important part in his presidency. Will continue – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:16, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
Indonesia and East Timor
Can we have some expansion in prose here.
For this section, would it be a good idea to merge it with the South Korea section and making a general East Asia section? That way it could streamline the article and fit more information, ie, what Carter did with rapprochement with the PRC
"Carter said throughout" → "Carter said that throughout"
Done.
"In the 1980 State of the Union Address, Carter .." → "In his 1980 State of the Union address, Carter"
Done.
"last 3 1/2 decades" – 3½ decades
Done.
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
", although that was not the case" – seems odd
Done.
" For example, U.S. intelligence closely" – Remove 'for example'
Done.
"execution of Ali Bhutto " – Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Done.
" In a televised speech" – add date
Done.
Overall, this section is well cited.
Done.
South Korea
"During a March 9, 1977 news conference," → "During a news conference on March 9, 1977, "
Done.
"stated he wanted" → "stated that he wanted"
Done.
"South Korean Government" – lowercase 'G'
Done.
Ref#226 – lowercase the title
Done.
"On May 26, during a news conference" – same as the first point in this subsection
Done.
" said he believed South" → " said he believed that South"
Done.
" President of South Korea Park Chung-hee" – implement MOS:JOBTITLE
Done.
International trips
Ref#231 doesn't cite the entire paragraph, and seems less relaible.
Added another citation.
Allegations and investigations
"The September 21, 1977 resignation" – comma after '1977'
Done.
"Director of the Office of Management and Budget" – lowercase
Done.
"Carter became the first sitting president to testify under oath as part of an investigation into that president" – Needs a grammatical tweak. Also, the source does support this, but I'm just curious that didn't Gerald Ford testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing on his pardon of Richard Nixon see this?
I think it meant the first sitting president to take part in an investigation towards HIMSELF, rather than against another one (as was the case with Ford and Nixon).
"Kennedy surprised his supporters by running a weak campaign" – if this would be mentioned, also mention that Kennedy's 12 victories included some crucial states like Massachusetts, New York and California.
"was one of the most difficult and least successful in history." – un-sourced, and quite controversial statement.
Removed.
"in the Third World " – Most readers wouldn't know "Third World"
Replaced with "less developed countries"
Ref#245 doesn't cite the entire half paragraph
Done.
"On October 28, Carter and Reagan participated in the sole presidential debate of the election cycle" – No. Reagan debated Anderson without Carter as Carter refused to participate if Anderson was included. Anderson notably said during the debate "Governor Reagan is not responsible for what has happened over the last four years, nor am I. The man who should be here tonight to respond to those charges chose not to attend"
Corrected.
"Carter was defeated by Ronald Reagan" → "Reagan defeated Carter"
Carter refusing to debate if Anderson was included
There you go again – Reagan's famous debate moment, which emerged as the defining moment of the 1980 election.
Debategate – In the final days of the 1980 campaign, Reagan's team had somehow acquired President Carter's briefing papers, classified top secret, that Carter used in preparation for his debate with Reagan. Source
Added all of these somewhere in the paragraph.
That brings me to former president Jimmy Carter. Seeing the overall length of the article, I suggest to summarize "Diplomacy" and "Views on Trump administration" sub-sections. However, the overall length can be justified by the length of Carter's career. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:16, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Post-presidency (1981–present)
The Carter Center
I'll suggest to merge this section with "Other activities" section. Just consisting of 1-2 lined paragraph.
"Prime Minister of Israel Menachem Begin" → "prime minister of Israel Menachem Begin"
"Carter negotiated an understanding with Kim Il-sung, with whom he went on to outline a treaty that he announced to CNN without the consent of the Clinton administration to spur American action. – 'with' is repetitive. Link Clinton administration
Ref#266, Ref#267, Ref#268 and Ref#278 need URL access date. Ref#264 and Ref#269 need ISBN number
"Carter traveled to North Korea to secure the release of Aijalon Gomes in August 2010," → "In August 2010, Carter traveled to North Korea to secure the release of Aijalon Gomes,"
"Carter received a phone call from Trump in which Trump " – 'Trump' is repetitive
""the most warlike nation in thr history of the world."" – typo
It seems like we missed Carter's views on presidencies of George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton.
All done.
Presidential politics
"1984 presidential election" – pipe 'presidential election' in the link
"In the 1988 presidential election cycle," – remove'cycle'
"In the 2004 election cycle" – same as above
" 2012 election cycle" – same
"criticized Ross Perot" – mention that Perot was a Texas billionaire businessman running for president as an independent candidate.
"John McCain" – mention that he was the Republican nominee.
"Leading up to the general election, Carter criticized John McCain, who responded to Carter's comments, and warned Obama against selecting Clinton as his running mate."" – Split the sentence.
" In October 2017, however ...... certainly that I've known about." – move to Views on successive presidents section
"Carter founded The Carter Center"" – un-capitalize and remove 'The' from the link.
Overall, few citations lack URL access date.
All done!
Political positions
All the subheadings likely can be merged, and summarized by removing un-necessary direct quotations. This section would look much better if formatted as Joe Biden#Political positions
Done.
Other comments
""personally opposed"" – remove the quotation marks.
Done.
Check the formatting of Ref#398. Also, convert the "Bourne" book to short citation, including the page number.
Done.
Ref#399 lacks page number
Done.
"Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson" – Implement MOS:JOBTITLE
Done.
" in the LA Times" – The Los Angeles Times
Done.
"He opened the article: "The process for administering the death penalty in the United States is broken beyond repair, and it is time to choose a more effective and moral alternative. California voters will have the opportunity to do this on election day."" – seems trivial information
Removed.
"Carter has also called for commutations of death sentences" – Link Commutation (law)
Done.
"Brian K. Baldwin (executed in 1999 in Alabama), Kenneth Foster (sentence in Texas commuted in 2007) and Troy Davis (executed in Georgia in 2011)." – Mentioning states important?
Removed.
"What led Carter to take this action was a doctrinal statement by the Convention, adopted in June 2000, advocating a literal interpretation of the Bible" – needs to be rephrased
Done.
Ref#416 and Ref#417 same?
Removed extra ref.
Ref#422 – Better source available?
Done.
"(the major health care reform law championed by President Obama)" – championed is Point of view
Done.
Ministry
"At the age of 18, he became deacon and teaches Sunday school at Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains, Georgia" → "In 1942, at the age of 18, Carter became a deacon and teaches Sunday school at Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains, Georgia"
"In 2007, with Bill Clinton, he founded the New Baptist Covenant organization for social justice." → In 2007, together with former president Clinton, he founded the New Baptist Covenant organization for social justice.
"this was an idea that came to fruition in 1982." → "this later came to fruition in 1982."
Done.
"Carter later recalled an abrupt phone call received in June 1977 from Presley who sought a presidential pardon from Carter, in order to help George Klein's criminal case; at the time Klein had been indicted for only fraud." – The second part about Klein's criminal case needs some explanation.
Done.
Religion
"the subject's "prayer partner"" "Carter's "prayer partner""?
Removed.
Family
ISBN number for Ref#432
Done.
"The Carters celebrated their 70th wedding anniversary in July 2016, and celebrated their 75th anniversary on July 7, 2021." – Remove the mention of 70th anniversary
Done.
"As of October 18, 2019, they are the longest-wed presidential couple," – Update the date, preferably using Template:FULLDATE.
Replaced with "On October 19, 2019, they became the longest-wed presidential couple, having overtaken George and Barbara Bush at 26,765 days."
"having overtaken George and Barbara Bush at 26,765 days." – '26,765 days' require citation
Done,
"2006 Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Nevada" – pipe 'in Nevada' in the link
Done.
" Republican incumbent, John Ensign" – Remove the comma
Done.
"is a former Georgia State Senator and in 2014" – comma after 'Senator', and implement MOS:JOBTITLE
Done.
"Republican incumbent, Nathan Deal" – Remove the comma
Done.
Health and longevity
Health problems
"Carter underwent elective surgery" – an elective surgery; and link Elective surgery
Done.
""a small mass"" – Remove the quotes
Done.
" "excellent"" – same as above
Done.
"The former president" – Replace with 'Carter'
Done.
Ref#452 and Ref#453 are bare links.
Filled.
Longevity
"Carter, the earliest-serving living former president since the death of Gerald Ford in 2006, became the oldest to ever attend a presidential inauguration, in 2017 at age 92, and the first to live to the 40th anniversary of his own" → "Carter is the earliest-serving living former president since the death of Gerald Ford in 2006. He became the oldest president ever attend a presidential inauguration in 2017, at the age of 92, and the first to live to the 40th anniversary of his own"
Done.
Funeral and burial plans
Merge this section with the longevity section
Done.
"Carter noted" → "He noted"
Done.
"The Carter Center" → "the Carter Center"
Done.
Public image and legacy
Public opinion
"still held Gerald Ford's pardon" – replace 'Gerald Ford' with just 'Ford'
Done.
"Southerner" – lowercase
Done.
"In the 1980 campaign" → "During the 1980 presidential campaign"
Done.
"Carter's personal attention to detail, his pessimistic attitude, his seeming indecisiveness and weakness with people were accentuated in contrast to what many saw as Reagan's charismatic charm and delegation of tasks to subordinates" – Point of view. Can we make it more neutral?
"Carter's presidency was initially viewed by some as a failure" – 'by some', by whom? historians, media, politicians?
Added the author mentioned in the source.
"In historical rankings" "In the historical rankings"
Done.
"the Carter presidency" – Carter's presidency
Done.
Move Ref#474 at the end of the sentence.
Done.
In popular culture
"referencing Jimmy Carter," – remove his first name
Done.
Honors and awards
" His presidential library, Jimmy Carter Library and Museum was opened in 1986." – Rephrase as " The Jimmy Carter Library and Museum was opened in 1986."
All other images from his presidency are assumed to be in public domain as it is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government /executive office of the United States president as part of that person’s official duties. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Removed all the violating images, and replaced the suggested one. Added alt text - this is the first article where I've actually added it to, so if the descriptions aren't satisfactory let me know. – ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 19:25, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@ExcellentWheatFarmer – The prose review is now complete. After making the necessary changes, I think that we can now proceed fixing the formatting and reliability of the sources. I fixed quite a few duplicate links, but do check for others. After all that is done, I'll review the lead section. Thanks for your co-operation with the review. The article has definitely been improved in past few days. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Gotcha! I'll finish up the last of the prose review’s changes and then I'll get onto rearranging the sources. FYI I'll be modelling the formatting of the references after Ronald Reagan's page - that being, Citations (for the citations themselves), General Sources (the books used as sources through the article) and Further Reading (the actual Further Reading). – ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 16:32, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Seems completely fine to me. Just be sure to convert the inline citations from books which are used in the current 'Further reading' section to short citations for maintaining consistency. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:41, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Maintain consistency whether to link the source publisher/newspaper/agency/etc. or not. Currently, some are linked, while others are not.
Unlinked all of the publishers.
Looks good.
Archive all citations using this tool. (Add archives to all non-dead references)
Tried doing this, but it said that the page was too big. Maybe once the sections mentioned in the following suggestion have been cut down I can try again?
The article is definitely comprehensive, but we could really make it more concise. I'd suggest to further summarize "Early political career (1963–1971)", "Governor of Georgia (1971–1975)" and "Soviet invasion of Afghanistan" sections. The article is currently at 94142 characters. Remove anything you find trivial or un-necessary.
Ping me after sorting out the citation reliability and formatting issue for another look. Feel free to tell me any issues you face with the citations. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:24, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
@Kavyansh.Singh I've trimmed the aforementioned sections as much as I think possible without getting rid of the important stuff. By the way, looking at the GA review template at the top, the article is marked as having failed in terms of being focused. Is there anything specific that article's lacking? Thanks! – ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 21:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
@ExcellentWheatFarmer – At around 86,500 characters, the article now seems to be focused on the main topic, thus passes in terms of being focused. Would give it a final read in the next few hours before listing any final issues or passing. Any further comments for me? – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 02:57, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
It has been a long review, and the article has greatly improved from its initial version to this version. ExcellentWheatFarmer has done a great job fixing up the issues with the article, and I now feel that the article meets the GA criteria. The prose is reasonably easy to understand, all major aspects are covered and citations look satisfactory. The article is neutral, and all images are fine to use. The article is long, but it can be justifies by length of his career (longest post-presidency of any American president). I am passing the nomination. It has been a pleasure working on this article. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:27, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2021
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
This is a very long sentence, and the "whom" is confusing.
In 1994, president Bill Clinton sought Carter's assistance in a North Korea peace mission,[252][253] during which Carter negotiated an understanding with Kim Il-sung, whom he went on to outline a treaty that he announced to CNN without the consent of the Clinton administration to spur American action.[254]
Please replace it with:
In 1994, president Bill Clinton sought Carter's assistance in a North Korea peace mission,[252][253] during which Carter negotiated an understanding with Kim Il-sung. Carter went on to outline a treaty with Kim, which he announced to CNN without the consent of the Clinton administration to spur American action.[254]
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
This sentence has lots of duplication:
In 1994, president Bill Clinton sought Carter's assistance in a North Korea peace mission, during which Carter negotiated an understanding with Kim Il-sung, during which Carter negotiated an understanding with Kim Il-sung.
When I view this article on mobile, first I see info about the presidency, party membership, governorship, senatorship, then the infobox with his photo and other info including the military service, and after reading many phrases, I see info about his 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winning. In my opinion, this prize is so important, that it should be displayed much higher. Maybe just at the beginning: "is an American former politician who served as the 39th president of the United States from 1977 to 1981" -> "is an American former politician who served as the 39th president of the United States from 1977 to 1981 and was awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002"? Another option is to include the Nobel info somewhere in the infobox. Maybe "Civilian awards" in the infobox should mention explicitly the Nobel Peace Prize? Grillofrances (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
No sound
Video "Carter discussing his legacy and the work of the Carter Center on the eve of his 95th birthday." is without sound. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3dcboz (talk • contribs) 22:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
First sentence
Why is he an "American former politician" instead of a "retired American politician"? "former" can work for someone who just went into another line of work ("I lost that election; I guess I'd better send out some resumes"), but when you've stopped your political involvement because of your age, you're "retired". 49.198.51.54 (talk) 20:15, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Counterpoint; why isn't he just an "American politician"? Why do we need to say "former" or "retired" at all when we have date rangers? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:19, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
I think "retired" is better because he's no longer very politically active. He's very well known for continuing his political activity after his presidency (which is very unusual), so the fact that he's no longer prominently politically active is more significant than for individuals like Bill Clinton, or for Gerald Ford before he died. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 20:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
WW2 veteran and Korean war veteran
Jimmy Carter should be listed as a WW2 veteran. He was in the Naval Academy from the summer of 1943 till his graduation in June of 1946. This qualifies him as a WW2 veteran. If you want to be picky you could call him a WW2 era Veteran as his service was state side for service training. He was also on active duty from 1950-1953 so he is at least a Korean war era veteran. His listing should at least say WW2 and Korean war Era at least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.18.55.50 (talk) 11:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
ALT 0 ... that Jimmy Carter(pictured) was the only U.S. president to have lived in subsidized housing before he took office? Source: Bourne, Peter G. (1997). Jimmy Carter: A Comprehensive Biography From Plains to Post-Presidency. Scribner. ISBN978-0-684-19543-8. LCCN96048593. OL22339703M. pp. 83–91
I can suggest some other interesting hooks (but do add them in the article too, if chosen). ALT 1 would work well in the last slot of a DYK set. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:05, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Newly promoted GA - plenty long and well written. QPQ is not needed (nominator's first DYK). Image is freely licensed and used in the article. ALT0 is in the article, but not particularly catchy. ALT1 is much catchier, but would need to be added to the article. @ExcellentWheatFarmer: Do you have a preference between those? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
ALT1 is indeed quite catchy, but I'm struggling to place where it would fit in smoothly in the article. Any suggestions? As for myself I'd prefer using ALT2 - it's in the article and being the first Nobel peace prize winner is certainly noteworthy. – ExcellentWheatFarmer (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
The section on the U.S. energy crisis discusses (almost exclusively) Carter's plans on conservation, non-fossil fuels and so forth.....but no mention at all that one of the cornerstones of his plans was coal. In fact, in the very speech we link to (i.e. the so-called "The Crisis of Confidence" speech), Carter says this on coal: "I'm asking Congress to mandate, to require as a matter of law, that our Nation's utility companies cut their massive use of oil by 50 percent within the next decade and switch to other fuels, especially coal, our most abundant energy source...[and later]...You know we can do it. We have the natural resources. We have more oil in our shale alone than several Saudi Arabias. We have more coal than any nation on Earth."
Additional information + sentence formatting change under Personal Life
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
According to this ABC article, Carter cited the Southern Baptist Convention’s views on the equality of women as the reason he left. I propose this change:
From ‘In 2000, Carter severed his membership with the Southern Baptist Convention, saying the group's doctrines did not align with his Christian beliefs, while still a member of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship’
To ‘In 2000, after the Southern Baptist Union announced they would no longer permit women to become pastors, Carter severed his membership with them saying “I personally feel that women should play an absolutely equal role in service of Christ in the church.” Carter remained a member of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship’
Arguably this addition may be overly detailed - but it gives the reader a more well rounded view of Carter and his views on faith and women. I believe also that the abc article is perhaps more suitable than the nyt article used as a reference - there is a hard paywall on the nyt article. However, the ABC article makes no reference to Carter’s remaining in the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.
Additionally ‘while still a member of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.’ does not work. I think it should be in a new sentence. Dangerscott (talk) 14:28, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
I added a more recent image to the infobox which was reverted by another editor who told me to discuss this on the talk page. I think that we should use a more recent image of Carter while he is still alive, but once he dies, use an official portrait like all other presidents. Interstellarity (talk) 22:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
We use the official portrait of still living presidents on their pages as well. I think the official portrait photo is best.Rja13ww33 (talk) 23:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I would like to discuss which official portrait we should use. I'll lay out some options on possible portraits. Which portrait do you think is best? Interstellarity (talk) 00:14, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
I personally back '''Option 6''', since it generally looks nicer. I think 5 has the best colors, but 6 is higher resolution. Mycranthebigman of Alaska ^_^ 13:40, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
We should use a photo from his period in office. Most of these are far too tall & would need cropping for an infobox, and 1 & 10 plus 5 & 6 are the same photo. Leave it as it is probably. Another annoying half-assed proposal from this editor. Johnbod (talk) 17:23, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
I am against using a recent photo because all presidents dead or alive are using official portraits. Clinton and Bush use official portraits despite being out of office for years and their appearances have changed. It’s more consistent. I support keeping the current infobox image. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Option 9, I think this was the image used before this discussion began or at least the one used a few months back. It's the best quality image/portrait IMO.
Option 8 or Option 9 – option 8 was the image used prior to this discussion. I’m good with either. Corky19:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi @FMSky:, I saw your revert on my edit changing the info box image. The reason why I changed it is that a substantial number of editors supported this image and the discussion has stopped since November. I would appreciate it if you could provide an explanation regarding your revert so that we can find common ground in something we can both agree with. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 14:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Could you please be more specific as to what you want changed? Would be helpful to know what exactly is being taken issue with in the article. Thanks. Planetberaure (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Carter Center: ATLANTA (Feb. 18, 2023) — After a series of short hospital stays, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter today decided to spend his remaining time at home with his family and receive hospice care instead of additional medical intervention. He has the full support of his family and his medical team. The Carter family asks for privacy during this time and is grateful for the concern shown by his many admirers.
Wikipedia editors have been updating this article quite extensively over the last few days, and it is in very good condition. It will take less than 5 minutes to change tenses in this article when Mr. Carter dies, whether in 10 days or 10 years. We've got lots of experience in doing this, including adding the standard template. It is a bad idea to have multiple versions of an article around, because it is easy to "lose" updates and improvements to the main article. It's a pretty fundamental point that we don't maintain two versions of the same article. Risker (talk) 15:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
I always get off so hard on knowing that, everytime something happens (big or small) that changes a celeb's Wikipedia page, many Wikidorks will be disappointed that *they* didn't get to be the one to do the update. I love the thought of so many pale Wikipedians hovered over their keyboards, praying in vain that *they'll* get to be the "herald-of-death," but they'll fail because another Wikipedian will be faster. This Schadenfreude really gets me revved up. 2601:14F:4400:A020:B0E9:22CC:B02C:9CF3 (talk) 16:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
The three African-American Georgians whose portraits Carter had publicly displayed were King, Henry McNeal Turner and Lucy Craft Laney. I have no suggestion as to how that should be incorporated in the article, but now you know. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 20:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
This article says that Jimmy Carter didn't have any health problems at all until August 2015, when he was 90 (almost 91) years old. Is that true? I find that very hard to believe. Seinfeld429 (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
@Seinfeld429: By "health problems" here, the article's talking about serious ones, and, yeah, it doesn't list any before 2015, when he was diagnosed with cancer. It is exceptional, I'd agree (thus the Longevity subsection). Heavy Water (talk) 18:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Capitalization of race names
Regarding @AUSPOLLIE: comment in the article history "rm capital letter added by political minded editor (if black is not capitalized, white should not be either": there are contexts where the colors as hues are not capitalized but the color words used to name races are, as in "Zoe Saldaña is a Person of Color who plays a character with blue skin, Neytiri, and a character with green skin, Gamora". In particular, most people including the editor that you reverted probably agree that if it is going to be "White" then it should also be "Black" when describing races.
However, I agree with a statement that you did not make: there are also contexts where the colors are not capitalized regardless, so whether we should use capitals is still worthy of debate. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 14:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia has some guidance in this area, see MOS:RACECAPS. To wit: "Ethno-racial "color labels" may be given capitalized (Black and White) or lower-case (black and white).[h] The capitalized form will be more appropriate in the company of other upper-case terms of this sort (Asian–Pacific, Black, Hispanic, Native American, Indigenous,[i] and White demographic categories)." Which is to say, we strive for consistency, but either "some Black people and some White people" or "some black people and some white people" are equally as correct. --Jayron3214:44, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
In this particular case, of course, "black" was used in the same sentence, and I don't see any of [the] upper-case terms of this sort, so I think this is a non-issue. Heavy Water (talk) 18:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Modify outline structure to identify "1980 Presidential Campaign" as a major topic
It contains important information of relatively wide interest that is made difficult to find because of the present organization of the article. I came here specifically to find out something about that campaign, and was initially frustrated when I thought it had not been written. The topic outline in the left panel, which should have guided me to the information immediately, shows "1976 Presidential campaign," followed by "Presidency." The last subtopic under that heading is "1980 Presidential campaign." The HTML should be changed so that topic shows up at the same level as the "1976 Presidential campaign." It's a very important topic in its own right, and certainly should not be treated as a subset of "Presidency." InquiringMind42 10:08, 5 March 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by InquiringMind42 (talk • contribs)
I oppose the Palestinian leadership (much of it, particularly Islamic Jihad and Hamas, desire the expulsion or murder of the Jews (which obviously cannot be achieved with negotiation)) but MY views do not belong in the article and neither do yours. AUSPOLLIE (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
I didn't write anything of my views, you did. I wrote that Carter wrote a book where he criticized Israel's policies as apartheid, and wondered why that was not mentioned in the article, or even given any weight. Carter's views certainly do belong in his own biography. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
I love when wikipedia users complain about bias due to the omission of a particular bit of information, as if any distinct piece of information is barred from wikipedia. Find an objective way to describe it and add it. HistorianFromSyracuse (talk) 02:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
This! If you think an article is missing key information, add it, or ask someone else to. It's not bias to miss out info, if a person was a member of the Nazi Party for example, the sentence "Name was a German politician" would not be biased; it'd be missing info. If the sentence was something more like "Name was a German politician who served under the Nazi Party, but he was one of the good ones" or something sillier than that example, then yeah, you could state bias, but this point needs to be clear; I've seen this dispute way too often. Omission =/= bias.
I clearly stated that it was mentioned and downplayed as “criticisms”, and not mentioned as “apartheid”. Check the version of the article when I wrote this and see for yourselves. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:49, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
You did not clearly state that. Go back and look at your post. You haven’t clearly formed a question or framed your point, and you did not propose any alternative ways of writing about this topic. You didn’t even make it clear in your post that Carter was comparing the state of the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians to Apartheid, you just said he wrote about them. Nobody can read your mind. It’s not a surprise that people who get upset at the wording of things on Wikipedia can’t communicate. Refer to my last post for advice on using Wikipedia. HistorianFromSyracuse (talk) 05:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
"Carter appealed to voters after the scandals of the Nixon Administration, and is credited with introducing the term "born again" into American lexicon."
These statements are introduced without any references. Both of these are big deals, without references. The editor who is adding them suggests that they are hinted at in the religion section. They aren't, and I'd be worried if the religion section was making claims that Carter was elected because of scandals of a previous administration; that's a political analysis, not a religious one. Given I can easily find references to the term "born again" going back to the 1960s, I have a hard time believing that it was Carter's presidency that brought that term into the "American lexicon".
This article is going to be at the top of ITN in the near future. We have a responsibility to make sure that every significant statement is properly referenced. So if these statements can be referenced, they should be appropriately placed in the text of the article and the citations added. Risker (talk) 22:08, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Daniel K. Williams in The Election of the Evangelical: Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, and the Presidential Contest of 1976; Randall Balmer in Redeemer: The Life of Jimmy Carter; amid many others, have entire books about this. Carter's evangelical faith and piousness was central to his appeal in the 1976 presidential election against Ford and popularized the term "born-again". It strains credibility to say that this is not worthy for mention in the article. (Including the lead.) @Jpgordon:@Risker:.
Per Randall Balmer in Redeemer: The Life of Jimmy Carter...when Jimmy Carter, a Democrat and a born-again Christian, won the presidency in 1976, he owed his victory in part to American evangelicals, who responded to his open religiosity and his rejection of the moral bankruptcy of the Nixon Administration."KlayCax (talk) 23:39, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Burke's article, the one that mentions the usage of the term "born again", says In 1976, Jimmy Carter introduced a new word into the political sphere: born again.. It does not say that Carter or his election introduced the term into the American lexicon. That is a pretty odd article, in that it stars with a discussion about Billy Graham, a preacher commonly associated with that term, having held political influence as far back as the Truman era. I suggest that be directly attributed to Burke, as in "Burke states that Carter introduced the term "born again" into the political sphere." (It should also be made clear that Burke's area of expertise is religion, and not politics. From the tagline of the article: "Daniel Burke is a contributing editor at Tricycle: The Buddhist Review and the former religion editor at CNN.")
The Balmer article focuses mainly on the influence of Carter's religious beliefs on his foreign policy while President, and I suggest it should be incorporated into the Foreign policy of the Jimmy Carter administration article. Given that Balmer is a theologian and not a political expert, I'd suggest that he is not sufficiently expert enough to analyse the effects of evangelicals supporting Carter. The New York Times on November 6, 1976 ran an analysis article entitled “South Savors Carter Victory And the Status It Symbolizes”, where the author draws the conclusion that Carter won because of extremely strong support of Black voters in the South, as well as voters from the industrial cities of the northern states. There wasn’t any discussion of faith-based issues. Frankly, I'd be inclined to remove the whole sentence from the "religion" section, and it definitely doesn't warrant mention in the summary. Risker (talk) 02:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
@Risker:"Introduced"means"popularized" here. That Carter's usage of the term popularized the term in American lexicon is indisputable and is backed by a multitude of reliable sources. His religiosity is a notable part of his character and should definitely be included in the lead.
"Introduced" means...introduced. It does not mean "popularized"; they aren't synonyms in any way. (Bluntly put, the well-sourced Wikipedia article about the term makes it clear that it was in common use well before Carter's first election.) And constantly referring to clearly biased texts (i.e., religious-based as opposed to independently historically validated) isn't proving your point, except to suggest that it's a viewpoint held by some religious commentators. It is probably reasonable to say that some religious commentators [with the 3 references you have identified] state that Carter's faith played a role in his support during the 1976 election, although perhaps it would be helpful to explain why that support dried up for the 1980 election. I mean, he was still an evangelical. That level of balance would be helpful. Risker (talk) 17:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
Most people say "raise children" (and use less and few "wrong"). We should go by what our readers say and write, not cling to pedantic over formality. AUSPOLLIE (talk) 14:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In the 1980s former President Jimmy Carter took up painting in his free time. Using his home woodworking shop as a studio, Carter has since produced more than a hundred works, capturing the landscapes and people of his beloved Plains, Georgia, and the far-flung places to which he has traveled to advance the work of the The Carter Center. Book: The Paintings of Jimmy Carter ISBN 9780881466881. King Beef Jerky (talk) 19:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
To be fair, the article already does give due coverage of his painting and woodworking, and other than introducing a whole lot of unnecessary purple prose and hagiography on the matter, the proposed addition adds nothing to the article. --Jayron3217:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2023
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
I found this from the Academy: "Naval Academy students are midshipmen on Active Duty in the U.S. Navy." [3] If that was true at the time, then it indicates 1943 as the start of service. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 00:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Carter graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1946. He was a student during World War II, when requirements were accelerated, so he graduated in three years, not four.
Even though students are considered to be members of the military and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, their time at an academy does not count as time in service. Federal time in service begins at commissioning. There was a well-known case at the U.S. Court of Claims where Daniel Noce sued to have his academy time count for time in service. He won in the lower courts, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against him.
Not true as a midshipman in the summer of 1944 he spent 6 weeks on a destroyer chasing Nazi subs. Your claim he did this duty as a civilian is idiotic.
And the facts you can cite to prove your assertion are?
The proof you have requested is all ready shown in his being awarded the American campaign medal. A medal awarded for war time service up until March 2, 1946. His 6 weeks of chasing Nazi subs in the summer of 1944 made him eligible for that award. He was on that destroyer as an active duty midshipman not as a civilian. The US navy does not issue the American campaign medals to civilians. Like you seem to believe.
Naval Academy students go to sea during their summer academic breaks. It's part of their education. And as I've indicated, service for service academy graduates starts after graduation. Billmckern (talk) 12:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
March 2 , 1946 Jimmy carter would of still have been a midshipman not graduating until June of 1946. How could he receive a ww2 campaign medal? Because he did active duty on a us Navy ship in 1944 that's how. 2600:1015:A022:2D41:50FA:A14B:947A:E33B (talk) 03:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
How many times can we go over this. Naval academy midshipmen go to sea as part of their training. That's doesn't count for time in service. In fact, no academy time counts for time in service, as I explained above. Cadets and midshipmen can go to sea, go to military schools, and earn the applicable service medals or qualification badges, but that still doesn't count for time in service. Billmckern (talk) 01:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Edit request - 9 June 2023
In the Legacy section, the page states "Carter was the first incumbent president since Herbert Hoover in 1932 to lose a reelection bid." This is incorrect - Gerald Ford lost his reelection bid in 1976 to Jimmy Carter. Elidunn1 (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
While Wiktionary adheres to that strict definition, dictionary.com provides that definition of reelection, in addition to one of simply being elected to continue serving. I think jhawkinson's suggestion makes sense (the source notes "Carter had become the only elected president to lose his bid to stay in the White House since Republican Herbert Hoover in 1932") and I've implemented it. Heavy Water (talk • contribs) 18:17, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
@Hellopeople900: You need to properly source the statement. First time, you didn't provide any source at all and I reverted you. Second time, you used a source that is considered unreliable per WP:NYPOST, and it was just linked to the main page of that site (no article at all). Another editor reverted you there, for not just that, but for other problematic edits you made [4]. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
@FMSky: I saw this edit summary and thought it might be helpful to comment here; I'm not going to get involved in reverting anyone but wanted to try to answer the "why a hyphen" question. The words "below average" wouldn't be hyphenated unless the two words are being used to describe and modify a noun, in which case they become a compound adjective and would use a hyphen, similar to how "English language" becomes "English-language sources" as used in WP:NONENG for example. Describing presidents as "below-average president" (with the hyphen) is reflected in media usage as well (LATimes, Axios, CFR, Washington Post). As I said I am not going to edit the article, I just wanted to point out that adding the hyphen wasn't wrong because it's a compound adjective in this instance. - Aoidh (talk) 04:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
I think the hyphen is wrong there. I don't think it is a compound adjective because "below" is an adverb, not an adjective. You can have "English sources" and "language sources", but if you want to indicate that the sources are from the English language, then I think you do need the hyphen: "English-language sources". You use a compound adjective when they don't make sense individually. You can have "average president" but not "below president", so you shouldn't use a hyphen in "below average president" - the meaning is clear. Bubba73You talkin' to me?05:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
It may or may not be necessary, I'm not sure and will defer to ChrisTheSpeller if there's a reason why it wouldn't apply, but I was just trying to point out that as far as usage in reliable sources adding the hyphen isn't wrong, even if it isn't necessary. - Aoidh (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Instead of "compound adjectives", let's talk about "compound modifiers", which can be made up of various parts of speech, including adverbs. The WP article compound modifier says "these adverbs without the -ly suffix therefore commonly take a hyphen." Washingtonpost.com almost always uses a hyphen ("earned a slightly below-average grade last season"). The hyphen is definitely correct in this case. Christhe spelleryack01:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Gloss on "hospice care"
This article from the Washington Post states that Carter "chose to opt out of any more 'medical intervention'"; he decided he would no longer receive treatment in a hospital because that would take him away from Rosalynn's side. In this case, "entering hospice care" does not imply that his death is imminent. FWIW. Donald Albury17:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Depends on how you define "imminent". While more than half of patients entering hospice care die within three weeks, 6% of hospice patients survive more than six months.[5] Carter is already into the long tail of survivors. Statistically, he now has considerably more than a 6% chance of surviving more than 6 months after entering hospice. Donald Albury15:59, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Edit the last sentence about his great great grandfather's relationship with "a black female slave that he owned" to "a Black woman he enslaved." 204.209.15.71 (talk) 16:36, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Not done That would probably be a misuse of the word "enslave". The proposed sentence would be valid only if Carter's ancestor had been the one who first forced the woman into slavery. It is far more likely that he bought or inherited the female slave. - Donald Albury19:29, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Sure, but the fact that his great-great-grandfather would still have owned the woman (and that she would have “worked” for him as a slave) means that for all intents and purposes he enslaved her. I don’t think the verb “enslave” necessarily only applies to the first moment in time one person captured another person as a slave. He bought her as a slave and kept her as a slave, which means he enslaved her. That she was already enslaved by another is ultimately irrelevant here. 103.211.18.33 (talk) 19:39, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The definition of "enslave" is "to make someone a slave". Why are you so set of avoiding saying that someone was a slave? How is is saying that a person was enslaved better than saying that they were a slave. It is a unnecessary euphemism. Slavery was a horrible institution. Being a slave was never the fault of the slave. Calling a slave an "enslaved person" is mealy-mouthed, and does not make the fact of slavery less horrible, although I think some hope it obscures that horror. Donald Albury00:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
I hear you, but I would submit that it is the “enslaved” construction that more decisively captures the horrifying reality of slavery, in that it phrases it as an action that one individual actively committed against another. To say “he enslaved” is to rightly put the onus of perpetuating slavery on the enslaver, as opposed to “a slave he owned,” which arguably continues to dehumanise the enslaved person by making it their primary ontological identification. If an individual X makes an individual Y work for them under conditions of slavery, regardless of whether X was the first to do it or last, does it not mean X enslaved Y, using the definition you quoted yourself: “to make someone a slave?” I do not see how using enslaved in any way or form obscures the horror of slavery. I think either construction is ultimately fine (I am not the original IP who made the edit request; I was only responding to your rationale for not using “enslaved”), but there are interesting debates over it that may explain the issue better than I can: https://slate.com/human-interest/2015/05/historians-debate-whether-to-use-the-term-slave-or-enslaved-person.html . 103.211.18.33 (talk) 07:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2023
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Jimmy Carter in HS:
should read:…”joined Future Farmers….[use hyperlink for FFA website].” NOT as written now -> NOT “joined a youth organization. The way it is now is like saying he joined a youth organization called the Boy Scouts. Sociologically - Across the U.S, Future Farmers is as well known as the Boy Scouts. It’s like saying “he joined a youth organization called the Boy Scouts” - Any Jr HS or HS kid in America knows it. It’s weirdly grammatically wrong. Ubiquitous to American schools forever. Comes across as ESL contributor 2603:7000:8240:15:3922:2A3A:3F9B:6392 (talk) 04:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
I was honestly confused as to why you commented as you did and why I was reverted, as the list showed Carter in third; however, it seems that the revision of the page I saw when making the change was vandalism. The above IP and I both didn't realize nor did I think to check, unfortunately. Acalamari02:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Death
Someone needs to add his date of death and details. As is, Wikipedia shows his age at 99 as if he is still alive. Today (on the day Rosylyn has passed) I see articles that say he was 99. Poor journalism, it seems some are simply not paying attention to details, possibly relying on the Wikipedia clock continuing as if he is still alive. 68.4.64.117 (talk) 21:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Traditionally men usually died before women, but in the 20th century there are many counter-examples. Sandra Bem died in 2014; 9 years later her husband is still alive. Georgia guy (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Seriously? The Carter Center's message about Rosalynn's death includes a statement from Jimmy because Jimmy is still alive. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia shows that he is still alive because that's accurate. He released a statement today. Wikipedia would not change this article to state that he is no longer alive without reliable sources verifying that information. His being alive at 99 is not unrealistic, there are individuals older than 99. - Aoidh (talk) 21:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
I'd humbly propose that the article continue to state that Jimmy Carter is alive, given the minor detail that he's currently alive. GoPats (talk) 01:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Please change the following text:
−
Carter endorsed Vice President Al Gore days before the 2000 presidential election, and in subsequent years voiced his opinion that Gore won the election, despite the SupremeCourt'srulingthat Bush hadwon in Bush v. Gore.
+
Carter endorsed Vice President Al Gore days before the 2000 presidential election, and in subsequent years voiced his opinion that Gore won the election, despite the eventual victory of Bush following the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore.
Bush v. Gore did not rule that "Bush had won". It ruled that the Florida recounts must stop. While Bush was declared the winner following the ruling, to say it specifically ruled that Bush had won is factually incorrect, and such an assertion is not present in the source provided. 87.115.251.186 (talk) 13:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
If we are going to say that Jimmy Carter was an “American politician and humanitarian…” we might as well list that he was a peanut farmer. Or just not list that he was a humanitarian at all. It seems pointless. Oogalee Boogalee (talk) 17:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Possible vandalism regarding Carter's death, which included including today as date of death, which has not been reported by any news outlet 186.84.88.253 (talk) 06:02, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 January 2024
This edit request to Jimmy Carter has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In chapter 'naval career':
Please change 'The painstaking process required each team member to don protective gear' to 'The painstaking process required each team member to wear protective gear'.
I didn't know that word. thanks! but can't another, more common, word be used instead? Wikipedia's language should be understandable for its readers. Jackthegek (talk) 20:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Portrait should be changed
I always thought the portrait used in this article was not ideal. Not only is Carter's expression weird (a half-assed smile instead of the big one he is known for), the specific image is an edit of this one, and as you can see, the saturation, sharpness and brightness are all turned up the wazoo. It just stands out next to the other presidents' portraits.
Missing word in first paragraph in subsection 'Economy'
There seems to be a word missing in this sentence 'Due to the $30 billion economic stimulus legislation – such as the Public Works Employment Act of 1977 – proposed by Carter and passed by Congress, real household median had grown by 5.2%, with a projection of 6.4% for the next quarter.' between 'median' and 'had'. The missing word is likely to be 'income' but I do not have acceses to the source. — Neonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 16:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC) —
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aasim 23:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Done. Noted Carter's endorsement of Clinton during the DNC instead. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 12:37, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
· 
· 
· 
.png)
the nomination. It has been a pleasure working on this article. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:27, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Already done Completed by Klue6824. —Sirdog (talk) 01:13, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg)
Newly promoted GA - plenty long and well written. QPQ is not needed (nominator's first DYK). Image is freely licensed and used in the article. ALT0 is in the article, but not particularly catchy. ALT1 is much catchier, but would need to be added to the article. @ExcellentWheatFarmer: Do you have a preference between those? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Good to go, then. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Done 3mi1y (talk) 03:03, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Option 6
Option 7
Option 8
Option 9
Option 10
Option 11
Option 12
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Facepalm
Not done That would probably be a misuse of the word "enslave". The proposed sentence would be valid only if Carter's ancestor had been the one who first forced the woman into slavery. It is far more likely that he bought or inherited the female slave. - Donald Albury 19:29, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
