Jump to content

Talk:Theodore Roosevelt/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Roosevelt did nto depart "to the West"

When McKinley's condition seemed to be improving Roosevelt joined his family in New York's Adirondack Mountains where he climed Mt. Marcy. He did not "depart for the West". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.209.62.115 (talk) 12:46, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2015

This page does not currently display correctly on iPad, unlike all other President pages. It shows up in single column form appropriate for iPhone, not iPad. This seems to be a fairly recent development. Smykytyn (talk) 23:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Not done: - this is not an edit request, but I will report your issue to the Village pump (technical). Please check there in a few minutes. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2015

Please add the following reference link under "External Links -- Libraries and Collections"

Theodore Roosevelt's journalism at The Archive of American Journalism 71.215.199.53 (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Done TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 01:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2015

Roosevelt was the first American ever to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

August 1910, then former president Roosevelt boarded a special train hired by The Outlook and began a sixteen-state speaking tour campaigning for Republican congressional candidates but also promoting his "New Nationalism" ideas, which, "puts the national need before sectional or personal advantage." It means that the "citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being." This required a strong federal government to ensure social justice. Roosevelt wanted laws that regulated the labor of women and children, limited the use of corporate funds for political purposes, and created income and inheritance taxes. The president should be the "steward of public welfare," while personal property was "subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use." The "essence of the struggle is to destroy privilege, and give to the life and citizenship of every individual the highest possible value both to himself and to the commonwealth."

Taken from "Up Close: Theodore Roosevelt, Adventurer by Michael L. Cooper

71.236.218.49 (talk) 15:23, 22 September 2015 (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. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 10:25, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Juris Doctor degree

The infobox says he got a JD from Columbia. This seems misleading. If he got such a degree, it was probably honorary only, as he was a dropout from Columbia Law School. I'm a dropout from physics grad school, and I don't go around saying that I have a Ph.D. in physics.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Columbia Law posthumously awarded him and his cousin, Frankin Delano Roosevelt, with J.D. degrees in 2008: https://www.law.columbia.edu/media_inquiries/news_events/2008/september2008/roosevelt_jds 70.171.45.85 (talk) 20:14, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

File:T Roosevelt.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:T Roosevelt.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 6, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-01-06. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:50, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Theodore Roosevelt
Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) was an American statesman, author, explorer, soldier, naturalist, and reformer who served as the 26th President of the United States from 1901 to 1909. Sickly as a child, Roosevelt overcame his health problems by embracing a strenuous lifestyle, becoming a published author, rancher, and Republican mayoral candidate by his late twenties. In the Spanish–American War, Roosevelt rose to national fame through his service with the Rough Riders. In 1898 he was elected governor of New York, and two years later he was made William McKinley's running mate in the election of 1900. When the latter was assassinated in 1901, Roosevelt—then aged 42—became the youngest United States President in history, promoting conservation and expanding the Navy.Photograph: Pach Brothers; restoration: Chris Woodrich
Archive – More featured pictures...

His given name

Hi, I'm a Taiwanese and I'm interesting about American history. I have a question, why I read someone call him Theodore Roosevelt, Jr.? And his father is Theodore Roosevelt, Sr. , his son is Theodore Roosevelt III or Theodore Roosevet, Jr. , has one of his family call Theodore Roosevelt II? --16:35, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

As noted in the index of Edmund Morris's biography on the president, he was Jr., his son was III, and the President's father was Sr. To my knowledge, none of them have ever been called "Theodore Roosevelt II". I don't have access to it at the moment but will implement it when I get the chance. Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:20, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. --Alfredo ougaowen (talk) 02:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
@Alfredo ougaowen: This is the customary usage. When a father and son have the same name, the normal pattern in English is to distinguish the father as "Sr." = "Senior" = Latin for "older", and the son as "Jr." = "Junior" = "younger". A grandson, or rarely a later namesake in the line of descent, is distinguished as "III" = "the Third", and so on. As far as I know, "II" is used only for a namesake who is not the son of the first, such as a grandson or nephew. --Thnidu (talk) 05:01, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
You hit the nail right on the head, Thnidu. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

"That damn cowboy"

Does anyone have a source for the following quote? I heard it said that when McKinley died, Mark Hanna said, "Oh no! Now that damned cowboy is president!" It does show the mainstream Republican opinion of Roosevelt. They put him in the vice-presidency to keep him out of trouble. It backfired spectacularly! BigMac31 (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

You can find this in Edmund Morris' Pulitzer Prize-winning book, "The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt. I'll look up the page and add that here ASAP. SimonATL 00:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

His own bibliography

I find it a disgrace that - at least so far as I can tell, searching throughout this and a couple other articles on the President - that this page on a prolific author should include a list of works. Theodore Roosevelt wrote many books, yet nowhere on Wikipedia can I find a list thereof. Am I alone in finding such a state to be inexcusable? Philologick (talk) 09:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

We DO know that T.R. wrote NO less than 35 books, some of them as separate volumes including "The Winning of the West." I'll add a section listing those major works. Speaking of his works, I spent 20 Feb in the Roosevelt Collection at Harvard's Houghton Library. Third visit. Glad I live only 5 hours from Harvard U. SimonATL 00:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Correct Pronunciation of Roosevelt's last name - Rose-a-velt

After explaining this today, for the 4084th time, I've added a section in the bottom of the article. In the audio recording of 1912 that I cited, the famous Abbysinian Treatment of Standard Oil, about 45 seconds into the recording cited, you'll hear T.R, him-SELF speaking his OWN last name. Incidentally, I shall NEVER forget being corrected on this commmon mispronunciation by Roosevelt's own great grandson, Tweed Roosevelt during a break at a symposium at Dickinson State University in 2007. Talk about humiliation! I had grown up listening to his name being mispronounced by my own father. SimonATL 00:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

we already have this covered in note a. If that is wrong change it. the audio is not needed. Rjensen (talk) 01:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Nickname "Teddy", include or not?

Moved from User talk:Spartan7W.

The nickname is used by numerous historians, for example [1], [2], [3], and [4]. Whether an individual "likes" a name people have given him, or any other fact associated with his personal biography, does not matter for an encyclopedia. --bender235 (talk) 21:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Bender, including it in the opening sentence is very misleading as it would incorrectly imply he used that as a nickname when in fact he never did. We also should have some respect for a subject's identity choice. Just because other people use something doesn't necessarily mean we should. It's very disrespectful to a subject to include a so-called nickname they abhorred. What a person actually goes by DOES matter. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
That's wrong. A nickname is not chosen by a person, it's given by other people. Sometimes that nickname is embraced, sometimes it is not. What matters is whether that nickname was commonly used (see for example [5], [6], [7], and [8]), not whether the person disliked it (or you claim he disliked it). --bender235 (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
(shakes head in disappointment) Saying nicknames people aren't something someone chooses to be by is absolutely ridiculous. Nicknames are something other than formal names that people go by. You obviously must be confusing that term with something else. As an example, "Bill" is a nickname that William Jefferson Clinton (Bill Clinton) goes by. The man calls himself Bill, and so does the public. If someone doesn't go by a certain name, then it is not by any reasonable measure something that should be included in a biography's opening sentence. The majority of works I know of simply call this man "Theodore", and the man himself went by simply that or sometimes "Colonel" in his life, so we should respect that per MOS:IDENTITY. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:52, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
A certain segment of the population calls Bill Clinton "Slick Willie". He does not refer to himself that way, so his name wouldn't appear in Wikipedia as William Jefferson "Slick Willie" Clinton, right?
How come the information on the nickname "Teddy" which is included in the body of the article -- that it was used popularly, but not by Roosevelt, and not directly to Roosevelt -- isn't sufficient?
For that matter, I scanned the article before typing this message -- I might be wrong, but I don't believe that the nickname that Roosevelt DID prefer -- TR -- is mentioned in the article. Shouldn't that be added?
Billmckern (talk) 22:21, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
To your first question: if WP:RS refer to Bill Clinton using that name, then yes. But of course they don't. The "nickname" historians refer to him is "Bill." In the case of Roosevelt, it's "Teddy." That's an undeniable fact.
Oh, and by the way: no one referring "directly to" Roosevelt saying "Teddy" is no argument at all. Guess how many basketball players referred to Bob Knight directly as "Bob?" Zero. How many reporters, during interview, addressed him as "Bob." Zero. Still we list that "nickname" because it was used in third-party descriptions of the subject (i.e., media reports). --bender235 (talk) 22:40, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't deny that there are sources referring to him as "Teddy". However, it is not a nickname for him if the man himself never used it. It would only be appropriate to include in the introduction if he did in fact use it. Having it in the intro when he didn't is misleading to readers. You also can't just outright ignore self-identity choices for articles. MOS:IDENTITY exists for good reason and should be out to use. Roosevelt is also far more often referred to as simply "Theodore". If Knight doesn't go by "Bob", the article should probably be taken to RM, but that's a separate discussion. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
@Bender235:, @SNUGGUMS: -- I don't want to argue, but -- what's the Chyron say at the 10 second mark of this video? Bob Knight Endorses Donald Trump in Indianapolis. Or this Bob Knight biography at Texas Tech? Or the headline of this news article? Source: ESPN will not renew contract of college hoops analyst Bob Knight.
I think it's pretty clear that Knight is usually referred to as Bobby (earlier), and Bob (later). Respectfully, I don't see how the Knight comparison helps the argument -- unless I'm mistaken, people DO call Knight "Bob". People did not call Theodore Roosevelt "Teddy".
Billmckern (talk) 23:22, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
The key word was "IF". I do agree though that Knight isn't really a comparable example. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Alright, seems like I'm the only one in favor of including "Teddy." So let's ignore WP:RS and leave it out, if that makes everyone happy. --bender235 (talk) 18:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Could we use a compromise form of words such as "Theodore Roosevelt (/ˈroʊzəvɛlt/ ROH-zə-velt;[a] October 27, 1858 – January 6, 1919), popularly known as "Teddy" Roosevelt, was an American statesman..." - it would draw a distinction with his preferred nomenclature, while recognising that a wide range of sources refer to him in this fashion, which would feel more in line with our policies. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:18, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Definitely better than using it in a way that would imply a nickname, but I'm not sure if it's prominent enough for the lead to begin with when the majority of works just call him "Theodore". Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:46, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
It's very widely used; Google Books isn't a perfect source (!), but I've just typed "teddy roosevelt" (with speech marks) into the search field and got 127,000 hits. Hchc2009 (talk) 19:54, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
A search with "Theodore" in place of "Teddy" gives 926,000 results. That's over seven times as much. If it was perhaps just four or five times as many, it would be more likely to warrant a mention. I'm still inclined to leave it out entirely. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:08, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Unsurprisingly, since his actual name was indeed "Theodore". :) But a very quick scan through some of the literature - including the 2,985 JSTOR hits - shows the name "Teddy Roosevelt" being referenced as his "byname" by the Encyclopaedia Britannia in its opening paragraph on Roosevelt; used in book titles; used in the title of magazines, journal and academic articles etc. - even the US National Park Service has used it. If we accept that he is often referred to "Teddy Roosevelt" in the media, I'm not certain what the argument is for not reflecting that in the lead, as we would do in any other article? I'm sure you're not really suggesting that we should censor the mention of this name because we think it would be "disrespectful" (I don't think there's a wikipolicy for that - medieval monarchs like Charles the Fat would surely have the right to complain about their articles before Theodore, I think!) but I don't quite understand what other reason we would have for not mentioning a popular name for him in the lead? Hchc2009 (talk) 22:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Mostly because he never went by it himself and nobody he personally knew called him that name. He also very openly despised being referred to as such and would quickly say so to anybody who called him that. It would be like including "Slick Willie" in the lead for Bill Clinton just because the public often calls him that. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
I think we should mention "Teddy." Wiki rules emphasize that we follow the reliable secondary sources. Hchc2009 very effectively shows a large and wide range of secondary source usage. Wiki rules discourage reliance on primary sources, which in this case = TR's personal statements. His friends and supporters used it all the time in politics -- albeit not to his face. Most Americans seem to have responded to "Teddy". Rjensen (talk) 00:34, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Again, I never denied that there are sources calling him such. However, there is MOS:IDENTITY to take into account, which says we should respect a subject's self-identity choices. There's a difference between abiding by secondary sources and outright disrespecting someone. Wikipedia is not the place to demean article subjects. "TR" on the other hand is something he actually used, as Billmckern points out. I'd be fine with using "TR" instead. The "popularly known as" is still better than using it in the nickname format, though. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
"Teddy" did not demean TR in the eyes of his friends, supporters or historians. the MOS identity rule says "use the term that is most commonly used by reliable sources" -- the rule does NOT privilege TR's preferences. Indeed it's a standard nickname applied without any problems to people named Theodore. Why TR did not like it is a mystery, but no one in 2016 is in the least bit demeaning him by using it. Indeed the RS use it in book titles in a favorable way in every case I looked at. Rjensen (talk) 01:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
It seems I overlooked the bit from MOS:IDENTITY before "use the term that the person or group uses" saying that would be if it's unclear which is used more often (except for gender changes, which gives precedence to the new identity). My bad there. However, the majority of credible works still just call him Theodore. I mention demeaning article subjects and their wishes because the idea of including a name that a subject hated came across as disrespectful and could potentially create neutrality concerns. If it makes any difference, the works I've seen using "Teddy" tend to be less "official" (for a lack of a better description) unless talking about how he didn't like being referred to as such. If "Teddy" is in fact included, just please at the very least don't use that as if it were a nickname since doing so would give the misleading impression that he actually used the name. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:15, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I agree that "Theodore" is the most common name. And I agree that we should make it clear that TR hated the name (why is that, does anyone know?). He was a politician who spoke to millions of people (on one day he shook 12,000 hands) -- and those folks called him Teddy. Rjensen (talk) 02:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

So to summarise, are we agreed that:

  • Theodore Roosevelt is the most common name for the subject, and Theodore's own preference; as per our policies, it should be the name first mentioned;
  • A very large body of secondary literature refers to the subject as "Teddy" Roosevelt; as per our policies, this should also be reflected in the lead;
  • That we shouldn't imply that "Teddy" Roosevelt it was a nickname used by the subject himself?

If so, are there any objections to using the compromise form of words proposed above, which went: "Theodore Roosevelt (/ˈroʊzəvɛlt/ ROH-zə-velt}} October 27, 1858 – January 6, 1919), also popularly known as "Teddy" Roosevelt, was an American statesman..."? Hchc2009 (talk) 06:10, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

OK by me. Rjensen (talk) 06:24, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
What about a separate section for his nicknames? The Colonel and Teddy are already referenced. We could include Teedie, the name by which he was known to his family as a boy, and TR, which seems to have been used often when he was an adult.
Billmckern (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Probably better to intersperse throughout article body. I've never seen any page dedicate sections/subsections to something like that. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:21, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I think that would work, too.
Billmckern (talk) 12:40, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
  1. ^ Hart, Albert B.; Ferleger, Herbert R (1989). "Theodore Roosevelt Cyclopedia" (CD-ROM). Theodore Roosevelt Association. pp. 534–35. Retrieved June 10, 2007.

Full version of cartoon is available

In case this helps, I've found a more complete 'timeline' of the roles of Theodore Roosevelt cartoon, first published circa 1908 (or earlier). Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

  • version in article
    version in article
  • full version
    full version

Edit needed

Please, can someone fix the typo "Macon, Georiga" in "Macon, Georgia"? Thanks.--93.147.192.126 (talk) 21:27, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Fixed. —ADavidB 23:43, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Edit needed

There's a bit of a grammar error here: "Home-schooled, he became a lifelong naturalist before attending Harvard College." He could not have become a lifelong anything before going to college. Perhaps "Home-schooled, he later graduated from Harvard." and leave his hobbies for later sections?

I would fix this but the page is protected. DMorpheus2 (talk) 18:59, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

This bit is reworded to note he began a lifelong naturalist avocation. —ADavidB 23:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Alpine mountains climbed and not

Being interested in the statement that during his second honeymoon, TR led an expedition to the summit of Mont Blanc and was inducted in the (British) Royal Society, I looked for more information, and found as follows:

second honeymoon

The only source cited (Britannica 1910) was not readily available to check. His second honeymoon was in winter, making an expedition up Mont Blanc less likely. From many sources, he avoided mention of his first wife, and avoided the places visited on the first honeymoon during the second (see below for 2nd honeymoon) From his correspondence, he didnt go near Mont Blanc on the second Honeymoon. From the Royal Society website, he is not listed in the all time membership records | RS all time membership

first honeymoon

In his autobiography he mentions "a couple of conventional trips up the Matterhorn and the Jungfrau on one occasion when i was in Switzerland" TR autobiography. Having examined his diary and correspondence, I view this as a bit of an understatement. Often walking alongside his new wife in a carriage or on horseback, he visited some major sights in the Alps, walking a number of minor peaks (Pilatus, Rigi, Gemmi Pass), walking 30km from Visp to Zermatt, and climbing the Jungfrau and Matterhorn led by the leading local guides, including Taugwalder. (Incidentally, the Jungfrau was much harder before the railway to the Jungfraujoch was made. I suspect that his route to the Berglihuette was up the Unterer Grindelwald glacier). letter comparing Jungfrau and Matterhorn , TR diary

From the diary, he climbed the Matterhorn on August 3rd/4th 1881, travelling after to Martigny 6th, arriving Chamonix by moonlight 6th, church (sermon poor) 7th, Geneva 8th, Basel 10th, which leaves no time for the summit of Mont Blanc.

I therefore feel justified in deleting the reference to Mont Blanc, and adding a description of his actual summits.

(Happy to back up in more detail if anyone objects, but it seems quite clear to me, although I'd like third party corroboration of Matterhorn and Jungfrau). Mattymmoo (talk) 22:11, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Theodore Roosevelt in Civilization 6

As of July 5, 2016, Theodore Roosevelt is confirmed to be the leader for the U.S. faction in the upcoming 4X Turn Based Strategy Game Civilization 6, I think this should be noted in the "In Popular Culture" section. [1]

  1. ^ Gameinformer Maganzine (exact issue not remembered)

1884 election error?

Is the statement "Roosevelt attended the 1884 GOP National Convention in Chicago and fought alongside the Mugwump reformers; they lost to the Stalwart faction, who nominated James G. Blaine" really accurate - Blaine was one of the Stalwart's main opponents in the Republican Party! Dunarc (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I changed the narration. Delegates at conventions in the 19th Century were not bound to support their nominated candidates. That is how Blaine got nominated. He always was the front runner. How he got votes from Edmund's and Arthur's camps I don't know. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

old text Coal strike Main article: Coal strike of 1902 In May 1902, anthracite coal miners went on strike, threatening a national energy shortage. After threatening the coal operators with intervention by federal troops, Roosevelt won their agreement to an arbitration of the dispute by a commission, which succeeded in stopping the strike, dropping coal prices and retiring furnaces; the accord with J.P. Morgan resulted in the workers getting more pay for fewer hours, but with no union recognition.[142][143] Journalist Ray Baker quoted Roosevelt concerning his policy towards capitalists and laborers: "My action on labor should always be considered in connection with my action as regards capital, and both are reducible to my favorite formula—a square deal for every man."[144] Roosevelt was the first president to effectuate the negotiated settlement of a labor dispute.[145]

question: should it sat refiring rather than retiring furnaces? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clgjerde (talk • contribs) 03:33, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2016


I would like to add more info on Roosevelts thoughts on immigration and how he is considered racsits IndiAsian (talk) 23:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

 Not done. Please provide reliable sources and examples of specific changes you would like to make. Thanks, GABgab 23:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2017

The following sentence from the section COWBOY IN DAKOTA should be modified from: "As a deputy sheriff, Roosevelt pursued three outlaws who had stolen his riverboat and escaped north up the Little Missouri." to "As a deputy sheriff, Roosevelt pursued three outlaws who had stolen his boat and escaped north down the Little Missouri." The changes being from "riverboat" to "boat" and from "up the Little Missouri" to "down the Little Missouri." Sources are any publication on the life of Roosevelt, which establish that his "boat" was not a "riverboat" in any accepted form of the term; and that the pursuit north from his ranch was "down" the Little Missouri, which flows north toward the Missouri River. 66.97.227.175 (talk) 04:49, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 13:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Natalism

Wouldn't it be better to simply characterize Roosevelt's opposition to "race suicide" as simple natalism? That's what it appears to be; from the article it says he viewed Americans as one race, forged on the frontier, and mostly rejected the idea of negative eugenics and the views of other social Darwinists. What Roosevelt is saying doesn't seem all that different from what some conservatives like Rick Santorum say nowadays ("we need to have more kids or our economy won't be stable anymore" or "we need to have more kids or Islam will take over the world", etc.) FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 04:33, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Theodore Roosevelt was NOT a Jr.

Theodore Roosevelt, the president, is not a Jr. and never was. This is inaccurate and must be changed. Although his father was also named Theodore Roosevelt, the son was not Junior, because it was families, not some law or standard, who made the decision to apply junior to the name. Indeed, President Roosevelt's son is Theodore Roosevelt Jr. This is the TR II who won the Medal of Honor for his actions on D-Day.

Notably, Wikipedia continues to get other Roosevelts wrong. TR Jr's page title is right, but he is listed as TR III. This again is wrong, and here is his tombstone to prove it: http://toursblogqa.com/etus/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/General-Theodore-Roosevelt.jpg. Here is President Roosevelt's Tombstone: https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/find-a-grave-prod/photos/2007/87/898_117518241843.jpg

Wikipedia does get it right when it comes to Theodore Roosevelt III, but this is only after I had this changed a few years ago. They had him as TR IV and TR IV was TR V and TR V, who is alive today and could complain, was TR VI on Wikipedia.

This is nonsense. The President should be listed as Theodore Roosevelt only, and the son of the president should be Theodore Roosevelt Jr. To distinguish the father of the president, some sort of reference to being senior would be appropriate. But the president should be listed properly, as many people throughout the Internet are looking to Wikipedia for guidance and they're getting it wrong.

For the record, the last time this came up, I contacted the Theodore Roosevelt Society and they agreed with me. Feel free to check their site as well or contact them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalan1994 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Not sure where the society said anything of the sort, but the president actually WAS Jr. per Edmund Morris' biography The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt, which also indicates the President's son was III. Totally accurate and not "nonsense" at all when the President's father was Sr. It's also common knowledge that when the original man of a certain full name gives his full name to his son, he becomes Jr. "II" is a misleading description since that would imply a subject was the second of their name and that the original namesake was someone other than a father. Tombstones can unfortunately sometimes make errors with suffixes. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:59, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

The Association specifically said so in an email to me in 2014 when this last came up. I will be happy to get them to say it again and paste it here. While it is indeed possible that tombstones can be wrong, this is not likely the case of several tombstones in succession and to say so would be to assert as a higher source Edmund Morris, the historian who invented a fictitious character to serve as a narrative for his Ronald Reagan biography. I think Morris' work is generally entertaining, but he has shown to be factually challenged in one case at least, and I think can be shown to be so here as well.

What is authoritative is that the real TR Jr. was that, not TR III. And it's not just his tombstone. His medal of honor citation, for instance: http://www.cmohs.org/recipient-detail/2972/roosevelt-theodore-jr.php and in every reference ever made in his lifetime. The newspapers were never in doubt about this: http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/ppmsca/24400/24400/0053v.jpg and here: http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/ppmsca/24400/24400/0072v.jpg and here: http://memory.loc.gov/phpdata/pageturner.php?type=&agg=ppmsca&item=24955&seq=2 and here: http://memory.loc.gov/phpdata/pageturner.php?type=&agg=ppmsca&item=24955&seq=5 (I could go on). In his own family album, where these articles appear, TR. Jr. is listed (presumably by a relative who compiled it) as a Jr. http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/ppmsca/24400/24400/0015v.jpg The Library of Congress uses the TR. Jr. convention: http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2002712392/

While it is entirely appropriate to distinguish the son (President) from the father, and include some kind of Jr. with an asterisk or something to do so, perpetuating the Jr. which he never once used in his lifetime sews confusion which is evident on the Wikipedia page for TR Jr. which explicitly calls him TR III, which is factually wrong, as opposed to merely subjective. Every documentary source I've seen in decades of reading about TR, including multiple biographies, stands by my contention with the exception of Morris' biography. It is fairly obvious to me that this one historian made an assumption based on convention, not on documented family history, and that he is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalan1994 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

If Morris' work was inaccurate, then I highly doubt it would've even been nominated for the Pulitzer Prize or National Book Award that it won. There's also Nathan Miller's biography Theodore Roosevelt: A Life that specifically states the President was Jr and went by that. Furthermore, calling the President's son Jr. incorrectly suggests that the President was the original Theodore Roosevelt, which most definitely isn't the case. It would be wrong to downplay how the President was the second Roosevelt named "Theodore" instead of the first. There are many people who mistakenly use Jr's for men who weren't the second of a name and named for their fathers, but it doesn't mean we should repeat that mistake here. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:17, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Theodore Roosevelt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:31, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Theodore Roosevelt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Theodore Roosevelt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Civil Service Commission

At least according to Charles Beard (Contemporary American History, 1877-1913) Roosevelt was appointed to head President Harrison's Civil Service Commission (in 1889?) making that perhaps his first Federal position? Schissel | Sound the Note! 20:53, 6 July 2017 (UTC) Why is the Civil Service Commission not listed under his photo along with his other official titles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.47.212.54 (talk) 23:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Theodore Roosevelt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:17, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2018

199.197.119.190 (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Not done: Your request is blank or it only consists of a vague request for permission to edit the article. It is not possible for individual users to be granted permission to edit a semi-protected article; however, you can do one of the following:
  • If you have an account, you will be able to edit this article four days after account registration if you make at least 10 constructive edits to other articles.
  • If you do not have an account, you can create one by clicking the Login/Create account link at the top right corner of the page and following the instructions there. Once your account is created and you meet four day/ten edit requirements you will be able to edit this article.
  • You can request unprotection of this article by asking the administrator who protected it. Instructions on how to do this are at WP:UNPROTECT. An article will only be unprotected if you provide a valid rationale that addresses the original reason for protection.
  • You can provide a specific request to edit the article in "change X to Y" format on this talk page and an editor who is not blocked from editing the article will determine if the requested edit is appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 20:28, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Please add photo

Please consider adding the photo at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Los_Angeles_Herald_(May_30,_1916).pdf because a picture is worth a thousand words. It could fit in the later years section near 1915/1916 where he is described as campaigning for someone else.68.40.122.133 (talk) 18:39, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Views on Race

I want to bring this topic up again since it looks like the "views on race" section has now been completely removed from the article. Although not unique in his views at the time, Roosevelt's attitudes toward race affected and continue to affect the lives of real people. This article needs a section on Roosevelt's views on race and eugenics to help explain Roosevelt's role in the Native American genocide and ethnocide that took place during his presidency. Perhaps a section titled "Roosevelt and the Native Americans" would be appropriate.

[1] Zebular13 (talk) 09:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Biographical wikipedia articles aren't meant to cover every single aspect of an individual, but rather to focus on the most important aspects of their life and career. This article is already pretty long at 90kb of readable prose, and as the link that yourself provided states, Native American affairs were not one of his major interests. Additionally, it doesn't appear that his racial views were notably outside of the mainstream. There is an article devoted to the Political positions of Theodore Roosevelt that does contain a section on race. It doesn't currently mention Native Americans, but that section could certainly be expanded to include his views on Native Americans. Orser67 (talk) 01:56, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/1093

Could you make the words "stump speech" a link to the article explaining them? This is apparently a US term, so it's meaning is not apparent to people from other countries. GNillePuh (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the suggestion. BusterD (talk) 03:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Erroneous Photograph

The photograph under heading "Latin America and Panama Canal" contains caption: "1909 Yokohama, Japan, President Theodore Roosevelt with his daughter Alice during a goodwill visit to Japan". Note photograph does not depict either Roosevelt or his daughter. (The gentleman on far left with glasses bears some resemblance but is not Roosevelt; Alice Roosevelt is not among the women pictured.) Please remove photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.120.54 (talk) 19:57, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

yes thanks --I dropped it. TR was in Africa at the time. Rjensen (talk) 20:37, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Columbia Law School

Hello. President Roosevelt's education section is currently deficient. in 2008, Columbia Law School awarded Roosevelt his J.D posthumously, making him an official member of the Columbia Law School class of 1882. The link outlining the award is listed below. As such, the bar on the right hand side of the page should include his Columbia Law degree, and not simply his Bachelors degree from Harvard.

https://www.law.columbia.edu/media_inquiries/news_events/2008/september2008/roosevelt_jds

Csmal11 (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Csmal11

 Done Alduin2000 (talk) 00:31, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect Rank Insignia

In the summary, it correctly lists Roosevelt as achieving the rank of colonel but the accompanying image is of a lieutenant colonel insignia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.24.24.150 (talk) 21:14, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Global governance quotes

Theodore Roosevelt was on record several times as supporting the creation of a world infrastructure similar to the League of Nations, but the following quotes appear to be fake. Can we source these before restoring them?

Roosevelt, usually in coordination with Henry Cabot Lodge and William Howard Taft, began offering proposals for a league of nations to guarantee the world peace, starting in 1905. In his 1905 annual message to Congress[citation needed] he identified the need for "some method" of control of "offending nations" which would someday become the responsibility of "an international peace power."[citation needed]
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/troos.asp
https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/december-5-1905-fifth-annual-message

Progressingamerica (talk) 13:58, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

What Roosevelt does say in the 1905 on this topic is the following:

I most earnestly urge that this Nation do all in its power to try to further the movement and to make the result of the decisions of The Hague conference effective. I earnestly hope that the conference may be able to devise some way to make arbitration between nations the customary way of settling international disputes in all save a few classes of cases, which should themselves be as sharply defined and rigidly limited as the present governmental and social development of the world will permit. If possible, there should be a general arbitration treaty negotiated among all the nations represented at the conference. Neutral rights and property should be protected at sea as they are protected on land. There should be an international agreement to this purpose and a similar agreement defining contraband of war. During the last century there has been a distinct diminution in the number of wars between the most civilized nations. International relations have become closer and the development of The Hague tribunal is not only a symptom of this growing closeness of relationship, but is a means by which the growth can be furthered. Our aim should be from time to time to take such steps as may be possible toward creating something like an organization of the civilized nations, because as the world becomes more highly organized the need for navies and armies will diminish. It is not possible to secure anything like an immediate disarmament, because it would first be necessary to settle what peoples are on the whole a menace to the rest of mankind, and to provide against the disarmament of the rest being turned into a movement which would really chiefly benefit these obnoxious peoples; but it may be possible to exercise some check upon the tendency to swell indefinitely the budgets for military expenditure. Of course such an effort could succeed only if it did not attempt to do too much; and if it were undertaken in a spirit of sanity as far removed as possible from a merely hysterical pseudo-philanthropy. It is worth while pointing out that since the end of the insurrection in the Philippines this Nation has shown its practical faith in the policy of disarmament by reducing its little army one-third. But disarmament can never be of prime importance; there is more need to get rid of the causes of war than of the implements of war.

So he certainly does support world government and in particular he holds up the Hague as having a positive role. I'm not sure what similar proposals Taft and Lodge were making, that could be interesting to see. Instead of the previous vague smaller quotes, I'll try to restore this with more specific language that he actually used. Progressingamerica (talk) 01:43, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Medal of Honor

Award in 2001? 2A00:23C5:E0A0:8300:B0C0:26F1:9A03:24CF (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Are you questioning that the award was given? The article notes in the infobox that it was given posthumously (after his death) in 2001. The article's "Memorials and cultural depictions" section sources page 18 of the book "Williams-Ford Texas A and M University Military History: Texas Aggie Medals of Honor: Seven Heroes of World War II" for this info, which I've repeated with another mention in the "War in Cuba" section. Are you questioning its accuracy? —ADavidB 19:00, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2020

I was going to add "Bibliophiles" under Theodore Roosevelt's category due to the fact that he read one to three books per day. Dilljl248 (talk) 05:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

While that is an understandable idea, I'm not so sure about such an inclusion not because it's false, but because this doesn't seem to be a defining characteristic for him (at least compared to his political views/actions, Presidency, Vice Presidency, time as NY Governor, or war involvements). See WP:Overcategorization#Non-defining characteristics for more. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Trustee of American University

Perhaps it should be noted in the section on his final years that Roosevelt served as a trustee of American University in Washington, DC from 1900 until his death in 1919. https://www.american.edu/trustees/historic-list.cfm?_ga=2.110676038.2141744296.1587754566-1420476289.1543564634 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14F:4503:3D40:1D4B:F994:9A4C:B169 (talk) 06:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2020

In the succession boxes, please change Roosevelt's predecessor as Republican nominee for Governor of New York to Frank S. Black, as he was the Republican nominee in 1896, not William James Wallace. 2601:241:301:4360:50CC:CC09:2282:115 (talk) 20:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The request is verified as correct and the change is made. —ADavidB 22:26, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2020

In the historiography heading of the bibliography, a recent book should be added: Michael Patrick Cullinane, Theodore Roosevelt's Ghost: The History and Memory of an American Icon (LSU Press, 2017). This is a comprehensive posthumous biography and details Roosevelt's legacy in various forms, not least among historians. 78.18.208.220 (talk) 13:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I've added an entry for Cullinane's book, as requested. —ADavidB 15:47, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit request August 10, 2020

Under post-presidency, 1913-1914 South American expedition can you please add the following names to his crew: Leo Miller (sent by the American Museum of Natural History), Anthony Fiala, Frank Harper, and Jacob Sigg. Pittsportsfan71 (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source to provide for verification? —ADavidB 14:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

In the first chapter of Roosevelt’s book, “Through the Brazilian Wilderness”. Pittsportsfan71 (talk) 14:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

These four names are added, along with a source citation. —ADavidB 15:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

CORRECTION

The election of 1886 (November 1886) took place before he went to London. Jmcasper (talk) 16:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

NYT October 28 1886. Morris, Edmund The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt 14- The Next Mayor of NY Jmcasper (talk) 16:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

He left for London after the election on November 6 Saturday on Cunard liner Etruria as Mr and Mrs Merrfield. He met private secretary to Lord Rosebury Arthur Springy Rice who was his best man at the wedding, after ship arrived in England on November 13, 1886. Jmcasper (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

You mean Cecil Spring Rice, HM Ambassador to the US 1912-1918 and author of the hymn I Vow to Thee, My Country. Khamba Tendal (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

A neat fact

When Theodore Roosevelt was in college, he wrote a paper for a history class about Oliver Cromwell and the English Civil War. Could this be included in the article as a neat fact? MightyArms (talk) 00:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

It might be included if we had a reliable source for verification. Without a reliable source, it can easily be considered too trivial. —ADavidB 17:02, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Seems to me it might be notable if it was the topic of a major work such as PhD or Masters thesis. But a random paper for a random history class? Maybe not so much. Does it relate at all to Roosevelt's later life, policies, or outlook? Why is it significant? (And yes, a source would be essential) - Kzirkel (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Race and immigration

This article needs a section on Roosevelt's views in regard to race and immigration. It's a glaring omission in such an extensive article. SamEV (talk) 15:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Point to reliable sources for verification of such views and I expect they will be included. —ADavidB 13:15, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/teddy-roosevelt-s-racist-progressive-legacy-historian-says-part-monument-n1234163 might work for a start. Oathed (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
There is some of such content in the New York City Police Commissioner section, and minimally in the Foreign Policy/Japan section. —ADavidB 13:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2021

Please remove the template "McKinley cabinet", as the vice presidency wasn't yet a cabinet position. 67.173.23.66 (talk) 00:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't think this makes sense as an edit. While they weren't technically a member of the cabinet, keeping their links inside the templates is useful for navigation and consistency. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 00:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
According to the cited source, vice presidents were not included in meetings of the United States Cabinet until Thomas R. Marshall in 1919, so it is inaccurate to include any prior vice presidents in the templates.[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.23.66 (talk) 00:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
These are navigation templates. Including these people in them is useful - perhaps rename/relabel them. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 05:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The navigation template is for members of the Cabinet, of which Roosevelt was not. 2601:241:300:B610:6DF3:59C0:DCD6:8622 (talk) 05:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. While the subject is usually linked in navbars used in their articles, that is not always the case. In this case, the navbar was added and is both appropriate and applicable because Roosevelt was, under McKinley, assistant to the Secretary of the Navy, John Davis Long, for a period before he left to lead the Rough Riders. So a consensus of editors should be required before that navbar is removed. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 03:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The Assistant Secretary of the Navy was not a Cabinet position, so including it within the template is outside the scope of the template.2601:241:300:B610:6DF3:59C0:DCD6:8622 (talk) 05:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
The Template:Infobox U.S. Cabinet does not include the Assistant Secretary of the Navy as a Cabinet level position2601:241:300:B610:6DF3:59C0:DCD6:8622 (talk) 05:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Nobody here advocates adding Teddy or any other non-cabinet member to McKinley's cabinet template. Another reason for including the previous president's cabinet template is to compare the two templates, McKinley's cabinet and Teddy's cabinet. We find in this case that Teddy kept all of McKinley's cabinet on for at least a year, and one of them stayed in the cabinet for Teddy's entire term as president. For some readers, that's interesting information that would not be readily available otherwise. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 10:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Harold C. Relyea (February 13, 2001). "The Vice Presidency: Evolution of the Modern Office, 1933–2001" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 9, 2011. Retrieved February 11, 2012.

Request Deletion of Semicolon

Just weeks later he branded as "false and malicious"; the charge was that he was using the offices at his disposal to favor Taft. THE SEMICOLON HERE IS COMPLETELY SUPERFLUOUS AND MISLEADING. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8070:A2B3:AC00:7829:2EE0:E0A4:4930 (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I've removed the reported semicolon, as well as the word "was" that followed. There's no need to 'yell' with so much upper-case. —ADavidB 15:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Medal of Honor Citation

I was just perusing the article and found that Roosevelt's Medal of Honor citation is not included. It seems that in all the articles whose subject is a MOH earner, the award citation is included somewhere in the text. So why not this one? I found the text of the citation on the Medal of Honor Society's web page for Roosevelt's award. I'd add the citation text myself, but perhaps there are those editors who might have a better grasp on the proper place to add it. So, I'm just recommending that it be added. Cyberherbalist (talk) 17:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Tone too pro-TR?

I'm a big fan of the guy, but the article reads a bit like Theodore wrote it himself. Hylahyla (talk) 05:00, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2022

Franklin D Roosevelt was a Democrat. The page here suggests he was. Leader of the Republican Party which is completely incorrect! 2600:6C51:6B7F:B7BB:183D:F30D:DD87:A157 (talk) 01:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)


Resubmit correction to my first request. My apologies I mistakenly thought the wiki page was referring to F D Roosevelt, however it refers to Teddy Roosevelt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C51:6B7F:B7BB:183D:F30D:DD87:A157 (talk) 01:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Did you happen to not notice whose image is on the infobox? Dimadick (talk) 08:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2022

A more comprehensive account of his views toward treatment in policy of the indigenous people of North America is necessary. Furthermore his imperialism is covered at insufficient length given the prominence of this aspect of his foreign policy and views of it. It is also of great interest the racism and the white supremacist sentiments latent in these expansionist, imperialist attitude as well as in notions such as that of American Exceptionalism. Dr.VeronicaNguyen (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2022 (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. If you have proposed text, backed up with sources, provide it here and reopen the request then Cannolis (talk) 22:42, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request

Some sources for the “assassination attempt” section.

“Schrank was immediately disarmed, captured and might have been lynched had Roosevelt not shouted for Schrank to remain unharmed.[1] Roosevelt assured the crowd he was all right, then ordered police to take charge of Schrank and to make sure no violence was done to him.”[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.235.63 (talk) 10:00, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "The Bull Moose and related media". Archived from the original on March 8, 2010. Retrieved March 8, 2010. to make sure that no violence was done. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ Remey, Oliver E.; Cochems, Henry F.; Bloodgood, Wheeler P. (1912). The Attempted Assassination of Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: The Progressive Publishing Company. p. 192.

Clarification of roles

Regarding the passage, "From 1904 to 1905 Japan and Russia were at war. Roosevelt admired the martial courage of the Japanese, and distrusted the reckless German Kaiser. Both sides asked Roosevelt to mediate a peace conference...", I have two questions:

  1. How does the Kaiser fit into this? Japan and Russia were at war.
  2. "Both sides" presumably refer to Japan and Russia, but I'm not absolutely sure, since the Kaiser was just mentioned as well Clean Copytalk 14:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2022

Roosevelt resigned his post as Assistant Navy Secretary on May 6th, not May 10th.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Spanish–American_War#May

https://www.nps.gov/thro/learn/historyculture/theodore-roosevelt-timeline.htm 2603:8080:7004:8C0F:4094:E96:94B8:8590 (talk) 21:02, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: [9] gives a date of May 10, which appears consistent with dates given for his successor in other sources WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:12, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Name

The suffix Jr. needs to be removed as Theodore Roosevelt Jr. is already taken by his son as is evidenced by the headstone at the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial of the actual Theodore Roosevelt Jr. Snowstormprune (talk) 20:59, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

On the contrary, it should be maintained as the president himself was technically Theodore Jr. when he shared the same first and last name as his father, Theodore Sr. Not sure why his son is often referred to with that suffix, but Ted was actually Theodore III and the headstone unfortunately gives a false impression he was the second man of that name instead of the third. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

While you are correct on a technical level your opinion isn’t a reflection of reality. He isn’t referred by that suffix anywhere else from national museum websites to the encyclopedia brittanica. His son has that suffix and that’s his legal name. On a very technical level technically it should be Theodore Roosevelt II because junior and senior should be used only when both parties are alive. Obviously people don’t follow rules always so it’s better to respect what the individual wants. If you type Theodore Roosevelt Jr. on Google you will always get his son. Snowstormprune (talk) 04:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Have a look at The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt by Edmund Morris (a book already implemented), which refers to the President as Jr. AND makes clear his namesake son was III, despite any suggestions otherwise. To use the II suffix would give a misleading impression that the second man of a name was not a son of the original (e.g. the two were grandfather and grandson, uncle and nephew, or perhaps cousins). Calling Ted a Jr. comes off as an attempt to downplay how his Presidential father wasn't the original Theodore. Whether the men are alive or not is entirely moot as death doesn't negate suffixes. If it truly did, then they would serve no purpose. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Photo and image formatting needs to be reviewed and improved

More and more photos, maps and other images have been added to this article over the last several years, giving it an increasingly cluttered look that makes it difficult to read and comprehend, particularly for people with visual impairments. At least several of these image additions appear to violate Wikipedia's Manual of Style/Accessibility standards which urge editors to "Avoid placing images on the left hand side as a consistent left hand margin makes reading easier" and "Avoid sandwiching text between two images or, unless absolutely necessary, using fixed image sizes." At this point, several images need to be removed in order to bring the article back into compliance with the MOS and make it more accessible for Wikipedia users with visual impairments. 47thPennVols (talk) 09:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Succeeded By (Vice President)

He was succeeded by no-one until 1905. That should be reflected in the infobox. Helpfulguy101 (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2023

Teddy Roosevelt went on many safaris 63.151.1.202 (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2023 (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. M.Bitton (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Robin Williams portrays Teddy Roosevelt in the Night at the Museum series of movies. (2006, 2009, 2014) 67.188.81.90 (talk) 03:09, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I've added this to the article. Thank you! —Matthew - (talk) 22:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
THIS Info is a WONDERFUL Addition to the “In Popular Culture” section!!
I also think some “excitement” should be added to this entry — ie a bit of inspiration — (for anyone & everyone — especially Kids & Young Adults) — to become interested is seeing these 3 Historical & Magical Movies!
I’m not a great “Wordsmith” — but perhaps someone else will be inspired to assist in generating this interest by finding the “right words” to imaginatively illuminate:
Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt is beautifully portrayed and literally “Brought to Life” (by the legendary Robin Williams) in a Trilogy of truly Magical Movies:
2007 — Night at the Museum
2009 — Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian
2015 — Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb
Mostly “historically accurate” — Teddy Roosevelt’s bravery & courage; his vivacious Vigor; as well as his soft yet strong Charm; and his somewhat simple yet brilliantly Wise Words & Excellent Advice are ALL illuminated in these 3 Films! Pulelehua11 (talk) 22:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
PS: tho I “get” that everything is wrote is not appropriate for Wikipedia— my hope is that a more talented writer than myself can & will “translate” what I wrote into the appropriate words to use! :) Pulelehua11 (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Length

At nearly 18k words of readable prose, this article is too long to read and navigate comfortably. See WP:TOOBIG. Detailed content should be condensed or moved to subarticles. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

While I partially agree that some of the sections here should be split off, I think it is important to note how such a complicated life, such of that as Roosevelt, needs a larger article to properly explain it. 2001:48F8:4028:1C23:E5B0:3E72:161C:35DC (talk) 04:09, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
I fully agree. Pulelehua11 (talk) 22:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
I agree--and when I was teaching I found that some students really enjoyed reading all the details about TR. Rjensen (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Agree with with the IP editor, Pulelehua11 and Rjensen. While I don't object to trimming any excessively tangential prose and such, the contention that the article may be too difficult to navigate comfortably seems a little empty, as there is a Table of Contents. Besides, most readers only read the lede and one or a few sections of interest, and students and history buffs really interested in Roosevelt welcome extensive coverage.-- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Minor spelling correction

In "Early Life and Family" section, 4th paragraph down, it says "Roosevelt began a heavy regime of exercise." I believe the word meant was "regimen." Perhaps some sentence rewording is in order. 142.190.79.202 (talk) 21:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Fixed the typo, thanks for pointing that out. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Lead photo

The black-and-white one is artificially desaturated and also unrestored. It's misleading to present a sepia print as a black and white one. That no-one realised it was misleading because the person who uploaded it didn't say they made changes to it anywhere on the file description page is not a good reason to go back to it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 14:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

The black-and-white original is held by the LOC here. My understanding is that sepia toning is in fact an "artificial saturation" - but I don't think originality should be the defining factor here. The crop in the black and white image is better - the sepia one has too much empty space. Additionally, we should view it in the context of what other U.S. president articles feature. ITBF (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
That is completely inaccurate. First of all, that's not the source of the image. That is a secondary image from "b&w film copy neg" E.g. a scan of a photograph of the photograph. It's under two megabytes in size. The Library of Congress rescanned it from the original, https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2002718198/ - that is the actual colours of the photo. It's sepia. That's perfectly normal for prints; generally speaking, the only old photos that are natually fully black and white are scans directly from the original photographic glass plates.
Secondly, if you want to use a crop, a crop exists of the sepia copy. File:Theodore Roosevelt by the Pach Bros.jpg (cropped 3x4).jpg. It's considered bad practice to use a crop of a historic image (just ask Charlesjsharp), but if you must crop it, why not use that one?
Thirdly, the black and white is unrestored. There's numerous scratches and spots on the image. The lead image should direct people to the best possible image of the person, so that people seeking images for reuse find the best possible image. Most reusers are capable of desaturating an image themselves, if they must. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 17:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
As I understand this, we're planning to replace the current lead image with File:Theodore Roosevelt by the Pach Bros.jpg? If so, yes, we absolutely should use that image. It has a higher quality, has been professionally restored, and will soon be a featured picture. Ed [talk] [OMT] 18:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
I believe it is ITBF who has been edit-warring, despite accusing Adam Cuerden. The version supported by Adam Cuerden is authentic and should be the lead image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
I concur with ITBF. The infobox picture should provide a more centered view of subject and not be filled with empty space.Emiya1980 (talk) 22:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden: However, in the interests of compromise, I would be open to using File:Theodore Roosevelt by the Pach Bros.jpg (cropped 3x4).jpg as the infobox picture.Emiya1980 (talk) 03:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
@Emiya1980: Would a {{CSS image crop}} to similar dimensions be acceptable? It has the advantage of linking to the uncropped image, which has advantages for people wanting to reuse it (they can crop it to the size and dimensions they want, and have all the image to choose from to make their crop.) If you're not familiar, it's... slightly more complex to set up - I can do that - but offers more flexibility. And it presents the full-size version to MediaViewer, Google searches, and so on; again, probably better for image reusers. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 14:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden That depends. How would it would appear on the article for Theodore Roosevelt?Emiya1980 (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
More or less the same as the current crop. It's a bit finicky to get an exact crop, but I can get one close easily. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 21:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@Emiya1980: I've set up something that should be roughly as discussed, based on File:President Roosevelt - Pach Bros - black and white (cropped).jpg's crop.. If something's off about it, let me know. It is a little bigger, but I'm not sure that's the worst thing in a lead image. Arguably a better fit for the infobox. It can be shrunk, but it requires a surprising amount of math to do so, so I'd suggest bossing me around as I know how to do it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 22:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden: Would you mind posting a link?Emiya1980 (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theodore_Roosevelt&oldid=1201083310 Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 23:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
As things currently stand, the image looks a bit too big for the infobox and there is still a substantial amount of unnecessary space at the top.
I just uploaded a cropped version of the Pach Bros. photograph. Would you be willing to consider this as an alternative?Emiya1980 (talk) 23:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
There is as much space at the top as there is in the black and white - I had to add some as it kept being clearly less, and the size is shrinkable easy enough. I don't think a crop helps much, because it doesn't readily link the original image for reusers at the MediaViewer level. But I can tweak. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 01:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Try now. I've shrunk it a bit. Don't want to go TOO close to the top of his head, or it feels a little too... crowded, but I took another few pixels off. Just to be clear, File:President Roosevelt - Pach Bros - black and white (cropped).jpg is the old image, and it has a fair bit of headroom. If we're going for a more generous crop, I'd just go full, as there's not really that much empty space. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 01:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden: Made slight adjustments to image. Tell me what what you think.Emiya1980 (talk) 02:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Had to fix the cHeight - it was creating blank space between image and caption (compare [10] with [11]) - but other than that minor fix, I'm fine with it.
You may allow your mind to wander at this point. It gets annoyingly mathematical from here
Long story short - and this is where CSS image crop gets annoying - if you want to include the bottom of the image, you have to calculate what the height of the image you're cropping from is, and then subtract from that whatever oTop is, because that's the amount you're cropping from the top, and that's the height of the crop you want. If you're cropping from the bottom, you can just trial by error cHeight until you've cropped out exactly what you want to crop from the bottom.
The calculation, by the way, using the parameters for CSS image crop, is: cHeight = (bWidth * (Original height) / (Original width)) - oTop. You can get the original height and original width from the file description page. In this case, the original image is 3,067 × 3,659 pixels. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 03:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a way to make this a little simpler, but I need to figure out if Lua allows you to get the original width and height of an image, or if I'd need to ask for them to be added.
Alternative image proposal
all this hustle because of 10% of empty space in a high quality historic photo? There is no need for crop or css, the photo is good as it is. Artem.G (talk) 07:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Just curious, the last two sentences of the "Naval history and strategy" subsection: "It has been commonly believed that Roosevelt's ideas were almost entirely derived from Mahan's book. An alternate view was put forth by naval historian, Nicolaus J. Danby who felt that Roosevelt's ideas on sea power predated Mahan's book."
Suppositions or accusations, not based on facts, are usually considered rumors. The first paragraph identifies Roosevelt's book as being published in 1882. Mahan's book (the second paragraph) was published in 1890 or eight years later.
This is not exactly in line with the source. A caption under a picture states, "Historians long have credited Alfred Thayer Mahan with shaping Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas about sea power". This is not the same as a possibility of plagiarism or copyright infringement of a book that was yet to be printed.
A theory considered "far-fetched" would be that of Donald Wilhelm, that Roosevelt stumbled across a book in the Harvard College library, "a work on the naval history of the War of 1812", by James Fenimore Cooper. The article states he wrote the History of the Navy of the United States of America in 1839. There is some plausibility to this scenario. The bottom line is that I feel the wording needs to be changed. -- Otr500 (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Teddy's progressivism.

It should be noted that Teddy was not a progressive until his second run for president which failed. 104.192.26.23 (talk) 18:59, 19 March 2024 (UTC) Richard Ely, the main "Progressive" (i.e. Big Government) thinker of the time, had a large influence on Theodore Roosevelt long before 1912 - as Theodore Roosevelt himself admitted.

Misuse of the word "liberal" in the article.

In the time of President Theodore Roosevelt being a "liberal" meant being pro liberty - reducing government spending, taxes, regulations and-so-on. In the time of President Theodore Roosevelt liberals were his arch opponents on economic policy, and on his lack of concern for Civil Liberties, the Rule of Law - for example his support of lynching of Italian men accused, but not convicted, of crimes in Louisiana. There also appears to be no section in the article on Theodore Roosevelt's support for lynching - which most Republicans were against. 2A02:C7C:E183:AC00:A4B5:E79C:4BFC:5E50 (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

The Comments of President Truman serve no useful purpose in the article - and are wildly inaccurate.

President Harry Truman did not know Theodore Roosevelt - he was the Vice President of FRANKLIN Roosevelt. Whoever included the comments of Harry Truman may have been confused. President Truman was not an historian and his comments are wildly inaccurate - for example Theodore Roosevelt was not "right of center" - he was the best known pro larger government "progressive" politician of his time, considered (rightly or wrongly) in 1912 even more pro larger and more interventionist government than Woodrow Wilson. Nor was President Taft "ultra conservative" - for example he approved the creation of the Corporation Tax and he had more prosecutions of corporations for Anti Trust violations than Theodore Roosevelt did. As for the comment about liking special interests - that is just abusive. The section serves no good purpose and is wildly misleading for students - it needs to be removed. 2A02:C7C:E183:AC00:A4B5:E79C:4BFC:5E50 (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Removed. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Harvard cite warnings & errors...OH MY

I went through and counted up all the Harvard cite warnings and Harvard cite errors in this article... there are 63 Harvard cite warnings and 3 Harvard errors. If anyone around here wonders what I am referring to, I have "User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js" installed on my common.js page so I get to see ALLLLLL the Harvard cite problems in an article and man there are sure a lot fo them here. I am going to try to work my way through fixing everything, might take me a while. If anyone else wants to jump in and work on this together, feel free. Shearonink (talk) 04:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to Nikkimaria who fixed almost all of the remaining Harv cite issues. I've adjusted one more reference and the only two I see now remaining are 2 referencing puzzles, somewhat unique unto themselves = The Works and the Roosevelt Cyclopedia. Shearonink (talk) 05:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Both of these are cited inline in the text - there are actually quite a few books still cited inline in the text that could be moved, even though they don't cause visible errors. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
pls give more details aboute theodore roosevlet 67.216.253.150 (talk) 17:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2024

If you do not mind, wikipedia states that I should split the articles into sub-articles. Caden dand (talk) 23:23, 23 April 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. Jamedeus (talk) 00:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2024

Please split the Testi 1995 reference into two different references with page numbers.

The "a reference" can be found on page 1516 and 1517 of Testi, though it does not support him being on a camping trip, merely that he was "in a stagecoach that was taking him on vacation." Further, the Thayer 1919, p. 20 reference does not seem to have any relevant information about Roosevelt's boxing experience. Pages 32 and 33 of his autobiography says that he was en-route to Moosehead lake when he was attacked.

So I'd suggest changing that sentence to "After being manhandled by two older boys on the way to Moosehead Lake, he found a boxing coach to teach him how to fight and strengthen his body.[1][2]"

As for the other Testi reference, I'd change the citation to [3], referring to quotes such as "Among foreign observers the perception of Roosevelt as a virile reformer was second only to the perception of him as a virile imperialist," though I couldn't find a perfect quote for him being the "exemplar of American masculinity" in Testi. GrapesRock (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

{ Done Now that I've got auto-confirmed perms, I've enacted this change GrapesRock (talk) 03:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Roosevelt 1913, pp. 32–33.
  2. ^ Testi 1995, pp. 1516–1517.
  3. ^ Testi 1995, pp. 1513.

Awful

This is awful. And it's depressing that it took so many people to make it so. There is little to no connection between the Progressivism of the early 20th century and the progressives" of 21st century America. That's pure propaganda. Can't trust Wikipedia on anything remotely controversial. You failed because you were founded in libertarianism, which is like being founded by L. Ron Hubbard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.248.74.48 (talk) 19:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Theodore_Roosevelt/Archive_5&oldid=1248295827"