Talk:Donald Trump Jr./Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

The Apprentice World-wide WikiProject

Please contribute to the relevant discussion here, as this discussion relates to this article. Thanks, Dalejenkins | 15:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Criticism of hunting

Jr.'s recent hunting trip has been in the news. I added a source at Donald Trump, Jr.#Personal life -- and also worded it neutrally. One sentence is probably sufficient. Bearian (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

A letter to the editor of the New York Post is not a reliable source. I reverted the edits by User:Trumpgirl. Bearian (talk) 19:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hair

Surely, his botched scalp surgery which, in part, drives the need for the world's most aggressive and creative comb-over, is worthy of encyclopedic summation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.97.87.243 (talk) 17:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

You are on the wrong page. -- AstroU (talk) 16:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Picture

This article is a good start. Where is the portrait-picture? -- AstroU (talk) 16:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, no one has ever created a free image and uploaded it to Wikipedia or the Commons. Until someone does we can't add a picture to this page. -- GB fan 16:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2016

Trump.com is the website for the Trump Organization and not is not his personal website

198.52.13.15 (talk) 13:21, 30 October 2016 (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. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

DJTJ cites

Special:diff/751920861 some sources were removed. The Tab clearly abbreviates his name as DJTJ in its URL: http://thetab.com/us/arizonastate/2016/10/29/djtj-at-asu-321 which I'm not sure how to reflect in a citation template (which normally over-writes URLs with the title, making them less obvious) but here are the others:

  • Puchko, Kristy (20 September 2016). "How Donald Trump Jr. Got Skittles Trending On Twitter". It even hit that point where you didn't need to mention Trump or Skittles to clock DJTJ's hateful tweet.
  • "Here Is Donald Trump's Newly Released Videotaped Deposition". 30 September 2016. the transcript of Trump Jr.'s deposition: DJTJ-Depo

If this was a controversial nickname or something I could see wanting more sourcing, but I don't understand why the high level of scrutiny over acknowledging some people have referred to him by these 4 letters. His dad's called DJT (there is even a restaurant bearing the initials) so this plus the J affixation for Junior is logical.

Going back to April's http://wthitv.com/2016/04/28/donald-trump-jr-campaigns-in-covington/ from WTHI-TV you can see the head image https://lintvwthi.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/djtj.jpg uses it. Ranze (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2017

Son of the President of the United States of America Linuxfan1 (talk) 17:12, 20 January 2017 (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. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 17:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2017

Add {{pp-blp|small=yes}} at the top. 219.79.97.174 (talk) 04:00, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I couldn't find a general topic section. The second paragraph in the introduction at the top directly above the table of contents speaking about DTJR and the Russian "collusion" has already reached a point of saturation. I guess my main issue is why is that in the introduction anyways? That clearly isn't relevant past a week and even if it was relevant to his whole life -- why is it written like a headline news story? It looks like a sloppy Facebook journalist added that in. Would appreciate it being moved to a "Controversy" section or something similar -- or even deleted altogether as the issue was ridiculous (DTJR posted the emails himself and the media has stopped talking about it, again even if they were talking about it -- why in the introduction). 67.170.106.112 (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 20:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

BLP noticeboard

there is a chat opened at the BLP noticeboard - see here , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Donald_Trump_Jr. Govindaharihari (talk) 07:26, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Update: the notice is in archives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive255#Donald_Trump_Jr.  Honette 03:47, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Czech nationality should be added

The law effective at the time of birth Trump's children by Ivana Trump (http://www.zakonyprolidi.cz/cs/1969-39/zneni-0) declares in Paragraph 8 "Acquisition of citizenship by birth" under point 4 the following: "(4) Dítě, jehož jeden z rodičů je cizincem, nabývá narozením státního občanství republiky, jestliže druhý z rodičů je státním občanem republiky." A child, whose one parent is a foreigner, acquires the citizenship by birth, if the other parent is a citizen of the republic. Hence, all Trump children by Ivana Trump are dual US - Czech (and thus, EU) citizens, unless they actively renounced their citizenship (which I think is improbable). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.214.215 (talk) 17:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

This is something that has been a topic of great debate amongst legal experts. In my opinion, something like this should not be added on Wikipedia for a variety of reasons. Firstly, while nationality may be inherited from a parent, it is not something that is official unless and until the concerned individual 'claims' it and holds a Passport of that country. Trump Jr. has in fact traveled to Czech Republic and seems to have had no problems entering or leaving the country. Secondly, the same thing could be said about his father, Donald Trump Sr. Trump's mother was a British Citizen when he was born in the 40's and British Nationality is notorious to surrender. So there could technically be the case that the current President of the United States is a British Citizen too! The point I am trying to make is that laws pertaining to nationality that is inherited by blood (Jus Sanguini) are at best ambiguous unless claimed through proper channels and by the concerned individuals holding appropriate paperwork. Until we have it on paper that a person is a citizen of a particular country, we cannot add it on Wikipedia. LukeShred (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Identifying the subject's children

Per WP:MINORS, someone who is incidental to an article, but significant enough to mention even without identifying them, should not be identified "even if good sources do publish the name, when a more general description will suffice." So let's remove the kids' identifying info. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:23, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I have never seen WP:MINORS used to remove the names of the children of notable people and have reverted this change.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Tony, I don't doubt that you have never seen this part of WP:MINORS implemented, but does that mean we cannot read and follow WP:MINORS? It says (emphasis added): "Do not name or otherwise identify the person, even if good sources do publish the name, when a more general description will suffice." Even if we ignore WP:MINORS, we still find similar advice elsewhere, for example at Template:Infobox_person#Parameters which says, "For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of children of living persons, unless notable." Suppose it were perfectly fine to give the names of these children; it would still be bad writing to give such detail including the full and exact birth dates. Birth dates are often used to confirm identity in our society, and anyway why would the year alone be insufficient? Surely we do not really want readers to feel it necessary to pay attention not just to the birth year but to the birth month and birth day, right? Same goes for the full middle names. It's just overkill. Anyway, since you haven't given any reason why we shouldn't follow WP:MINORS here, I will revert. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I also strongly oppose adding the names of minor children.Classafelonymonkey (talk) 11:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
The source used currently names the daughter in the title. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:45, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Russia "criticism".

Regarding Don Jr's Russia stuff - there's nothing wrong with mentioning it in the lede, but we have to be careful about talking about the criticism. Some have criticized the infamous meeting, while some have shrugged their shoulders or even outright defended him. To focus only on the criticism would go against WP:NPOV, which was why someone put the template there. All I did was word things in a way that acknowledges the meeting, without going into support/criticism, as that's not territory Wikipedia should be getting into.

I don't want this going into a big back and forth, so I just wanted to put in my $0.02 and explain why I did what I did...just trying to adhere to policy.

Thank you.

Vjmlhds (talk) 18:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I have edited the article to include a reference to verify that Trump Jr did face some sharp criticism for his infamous meeting. That is a verifiable fact, and should be included in the article. I have also made sure to add that the criticism was by some to show that it wasn't universal (that is also a verifiable fact as the reference showed that some came to Trump Jr's defense). By adding the "by some" qualifier, that should address the NPOV issue, as to make it clear there was both criticism and support. Any edit done that includes verifiable references is not a "revert", but merely an edit done with the intent of improving an article. Thank you. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:33, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Adding Category:Trump administration controversies

There were some who said that a person cannot be a controversy. Since the name of Barack Obama is constantly being used in sentences with Trump, I must point to you that there are at least 4 people in the category of Obama administration controversies. That is why I will return the category. Radiohist (talk) 23:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't see any biographies included in Category:Obama administration controversies. I will assume they were there and someone rightly removed them from the category. A person can be controversial and can be involved in a controversy, but they can not be a controversy. ~ GB fan 14:02, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Donald Trump Jr.. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Inconsistant use of Jr.

The article randomly switches back and forth between calling him "Trump" and "Trump Jr." Unless someone objects, I will change all to either "Trump Jr." or "President Trump," as applicable. Comfr (talk)

His father was not president for the majority of his live, so I am not sure if that is appropriate. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
That is a good point. How about Trump Sr. or Trump's father? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Comfr (talk • contribs)
I think Trump's father might be best, as the father is not commonly known as Trump Sr. Thankfully these issues are not present with Ivana and her daughter, as the daughter uses the diminutive Ivanka. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I think I have fixed all the inconsistencies. I would appreciate if you would re-check my work. Thanks again. Comfr (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Looks like you missed one in the last paragraph which I fixed, but other than that I am grateful for your work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emir of Wikipedia (talk • contribs)

Maternal grandfather and knowledge of the Czech language

@DrFleischman: You removed these two claims. Is your issue merely with sourcing, or also on other grounds? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Primarily sourcing. I also question the noteworthiness of Trump Jr.'s closeness with his grandfather. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:50, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Material was inserted by KalHolmann. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, sorry, I didn't mean to bypass your discussion here with Dr. Fleischman. But The New York Times found Trump Jr.'s relationship with his maternal grandfather noteworthy enough to include in the lead paragraph of its March 2017 profile. So I've added it, properly sourced, to our BLP. KalHolmann (talk) 22:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
The sanctions at the top of the page state "Consensus required: All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion). If in doubt, don't make the edit." As it was removed on grounds of sourcing I don't think this is a violation, but next time comment here before you do something like that. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, you are right. I acted without consensus, for which I apologize to you and Dr. Fleischman. I have reverted my edit accordingly. KalHolmann (talk) 23:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

If it's not too late to normalize this procedure, I request consensus to resurrect my contribution shown in this diff of a subsequently reverted edit. Admittedly, it tends to humanize Donald Trump Jr., which may not be the effect we're striving for here (given WP:NPOV). But p Perhaps we can take our cue from The New York Times, which found Trump Jr.'s relationship with his maternal grandfather noteworthy enough to include in the lead paragraph of their March 2017 profile. KalHolmann (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2017 (UTC) Additional comment: Context matters.
The sentence I inserted, then removed, read: "As a boy, Trump Jr. found a role model in his maternal grandfather, Milos Zelnicek, at whose home near Prague he spent summers camping, fishing, hunting and learning the Czech language." Its placement in the article's first section, "Early life and education," gave this a childhood innocence that does not implicate WP:NPOV.

However, I now see a similar sentence later in the article. Paragraph 2 of the "Personal life" section begins, "In his childhood, Trump Jr. learned to hunt and fish by spending time with his maternal grandfather in what was then Czechoslovakia." This is immediately followed by the adult Trump Jr. slaughtering endangered species in Africa.

The implication is clear. Far from being a wholesome familial bonding, Trump Jr.'s summers with Grandad prepared him for butchering leopards, elephants, and—when big game was not available—prairie dogs.

I suggest that restoring the sentence to "Early life and education" and deleting it from "Personal life" would give us a more neutral WP:BLP. KalHolmann (talk) 04:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Your suggestion sounds good to me. Let's wait a day or two and see if Dr Fleischman has anything to say on the matter. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm fine with it. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 Done Restored one sentence to "Early life and education" and removed another from "Personal life" pursuant to foregoing discussion. KalHolmann (talk) 00:33, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Unsourced material

"After college graduation, Trump moved to Aspen, Colorado. He hunted, fished, skied, lived in a truck, and worked as a bartender for a year before returning to New York and joining the Trump Organization."

The claim that Donald Trump Jr. was, albeit temporarily and voluntarily, homeless doesn't appear to have any form of citation anywhere, and, when phrased that way, could be construed as a form of mockery if untrue - does anyone know of a source that can back this line up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.3.106 (talk) 09:16, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

It is sourced in citation 7. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Events of October 31 and November 7

Should we include the events of October 31 and November 7? On the 4th February I removed it but then my edit was reverted by DrFleischman who said that they have lasting significance and coverage. Today the content was removed again by JFG. The arbitration remedies state that we must have consensus before reinstating any edits that have been challenged. If there is lasting significance and coverage perhaps then it warrants inclusion but I don't think what currently stands should be included. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I didn't notice the February 4 removal. I was just casually reading the article, and quoting those tweets looked very anecdotal. What is their impact on Trump Jr's life or on anybody else? Absolutely undue for a biography. — JFG talk 02:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
There doesn't have to be an impact on anyone's life. These things are appropriate because they received tremendous news coverage, probably because they were controversial and reflected something about Trump Jr. It's not like the article is too long and needs to be cut down. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 09:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill temporary press coverage does not make longstanding importance. That Trump Jr. fucked up an election date in a tweet frankly doesn't strike me as anything noteworthy. Same for his snarky joke about teaching socialism to his daughter. — JFG talk 12:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Just because the article is not long doesn't mean we need to fill with unnoteworthy information to make it longer. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
"Run-of-the-mill temporary press coverage" is verifiably false. This was not one or two news articles at the time of the event. This was lots of press coverage. For the Halloween story at least the coverage extended well past the event. [1] --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Frankly, those tweets have WP:FART-level notability. — JFG talk 01:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I see we're having an enlightened discussion here. It might help if you actually reviewed some sources. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 05:38, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm not denying that sources did comment on those Twitter utterances. I'm saying that they have no long-term significance, and are not what Trump Jr will be remembered for (this is his encyclopedic biography). We need to exercise editorial judgment, not just parrot clickbait news of the day. — JFG talk 09:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
And as I demonstrated, this wasn’t clickbait news of the day—at least not the Halloween candy story, which was discussed in TIME Magazine two months later. —Dr. Fleischman (talk) 09:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Wife´ś Mail Hospital Scare

In February 12, 2018 Donald Trump Jr´s wife Vanessa opened mail with white powder in it, so she was rushed to hospital as a precaution. Massivegamer5647 (talk) 16:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2018

Add link to his Twitter https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr in his infobox 151.231.13.32 (talk) 12:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC) 151.231.13.32 (talk) 12:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Per: WP:Twitter-EL Spintendo      14:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Mentions of divorce

Near the end of the Thursday evening, March 15, 2018 PBS Newshour, Judy Woodruff mentioned that there are rumors that Vanesse Trump is filing for divorce from her husband, Donald Trump, Jr.. Around the same hour that day, The New York Daily News reported that rumor, also.Brown, S.R. Donald Trump Jr.’s wife Vanessa files for divorce. Donald Trump Jr.’s wife Vanessa files for divorce. March 15, 2018, 6:42 PM. They printed:

The divorce was listed as "uncontested," indicating the split was amicable.

In a two to three-hour period, the report was echoed by Politico, People Magazine, USA Today, Time Magazine, Chicago Daily News, London Daily Telegraph, TMZ (for what that's worth), AOL.com, Boston.com, Page Six, Vanity Fair, Fox News, Slate.com, and Bloomberg News. MaynardClark (talk) 23:38, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

The information has been confirmed through a joint statement issued by Trump Jr. and Vanessa Trump and reported by CNN and the New York Times. It has been added to the Personal life section. Note that an uncontested divorce doesn't necessarily mean "the split [is] amicable", in the sense that both parties want to divorce; it means that the parties have already negotiated the division of property and other issues and that the court need not dictate the settlement of those matters (though it will ensure that they are settled equitably). General Ization Talk 04:16, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Conspiracy category and now a sentence in the lead?

Shouldn't this be reserved for real conspiracy theorists not people who like twitter comments.--Malerooster (talk) 23:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)?

Twitter is how conspiracy theories are promoted these days, and Jr's received a whole lot of press coverage over his Twitter behavior. It's in three different sections of our article, and the sources bear it out. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:59, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
So liking some questionable tweets makes one a conspiracy theorist? --Malerooster (talk) 00:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
That's a bit rough. Removed category per WP:NONDEF. Not convinced the labeling of "promoting various conspiracy theories" is lede-worthy. At least this statement should be attributed to Hogg, per source, and limited to one conspiracy theory (that Hogg is a plant). Still, I don't see how Trump Jr. can be called a serial conspiracy theorist, but I understand that some editors may have a different view. More sources needed. — JFG talk 01:18, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Re-read the source. In one place it's attributed to Hogg, but I believe in two others the source says it outright. Not to mention that references to Jr's promotion of conspiracy theories is scattered all over the body of the article. There are lots and lots of sources discussing this. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 05:18, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
It's one of the things he's most known for.[2] Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:59, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
It is one of the thing he is recently known for. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2018

That in 'personal life' where it says "On March 15, 2018, Trump Jr. and Vanessa Trump announced that the couple had separated and that she had filed for divorce in Manhattan Supreme Court.[62][63] The divorce is uncontested.[62][64] However, later it was revealed that the divorce is contested.[65] The complaint is secret except for the title of the case.[66]" I believe that for clarity, sentence two should be merged with sentence one to become 'Vanessa Trump announced she had filed for divorce in Manhattan Supreme Court, and that the divorce was uncontested.' 2601:CD:4102:7D98:18E:2AD7:C44E:B5A2 (talk) 02:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done - Glm705 (open channel) 02:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Comparing Democrats to Nazis

It is WP:DUE that a political activist with a large following and high-profile media presence who campaigns for Republican politicians across the country likens the DNC platform to that of Hitler's Nazi party. Weight is also substantiated by extensive RS coverage (I cited three high-quality RS in the article but there are far more out there). Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

WaPo story about Trump Jr's 2018 campaign stardom explicitly mentions this episode, substantiating that it's notable and that it fits into a broader context of a high-profile political activist[3]. Trump Jr is not a nobody and he is not apolitical, and it's strange to treat him as such and deprive readers of what he stands for politically. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 01:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2018

Ivana Marie Trump should read Ivanka Marie Trump 170.250.183.211 (talk) 18:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Ivana is the name of his mother, Ivanka is the name of his sister Danski454 (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Gas chamber comment

I have removed this for NOW. Again, how notable to the subject's bio will this be in 5 years? Its also not good to have a controversy section since, as one editor has pointed out, this becomes a sh*t magnet. Also undue weight compared to the rest of the bio.--Malerooster (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

This should be added it's relevant to today maybe not in 5 years though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpf1009 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Political career?

Someone should make note of his political career, which was mainly campaigning for his father. He is also on the Trump Transition team which has led to some degree of criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.47.212.54 (talk) 00:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

He has no political career he has been a puppet for his father. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpf1009 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Running Trump Org

He and Eric were announced as "running" the business, but there's no proof that they actually are. Plus, shouldn't any mention of the Trump business also mention the Trust, that has Sr. as the sole beneficiary, does not "meet the standards" of former presidents.

And, Allen Weisselberg is also a Trustee; it's not just the sons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:2153:8F00:ED6F:B215:A55:8614 (talk) 20:13, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Joel Zamel should not be redirecting to an article about a company with wiki in its name

Could someone please remove the redirect but keep Joel Zamel as an article will appear shortly? Joel Zamel was named in connection with allegations of Meddling in Social Media outside it`s Israeli base, and recent disclosure at the Oxford Union event last week have lead to several new newsmedia stories, so, best de-link Joel Zamel from wiki, and leave a redlink to his future article. Thanks219.101.236.86 (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

X1\ already made it a redirect to Psy-Group less than a month ago. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 21:33, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Go ahead and remove that link, as redirected an individuals name to a business name creates BLP issues. The individual has a (currently) growing notoriety, or notability. Can you understand already? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.101.236.86 (talk) 21:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
219.101.236.86, You can just replace the REDIRECT yourself by starting a Wikipedia article for Zamel there, since none currently exists in Wikipedia I have found. X1\ (talk) 00:12, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
219.101.236.86, since you appear to be new to this, it would be best to start with a draft first. Good luck. X1\ (talk) 00:26, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2020

Change link from "big game hunting" to "hunting", as big game hunting is a specific subset of hunting. IDeagle94 (talk) 04:37, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@IDeagle94:  Not done: I don't see the words "big game" anywhere in the article. GoingBatty (talk) 01:57, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

prejudicial and irrelevant allegations, in place of factual biography

He had a meeting with a Russian lawyer, who promised damaging information about the campaign of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.[3][4][5] He is known for promoting conspiracy theories and false information 2600:1007:B0A2:1605:D9FC:A00A:2FBA:9D82 (talk) 23:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)Michael Quillen

And? These things are true, and reliably sourced. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

“He is known for promoting conspiracy theories and false information” is purely opinion. The Washington Post is not a reliable source. It’s an “Orange Man Bad” delusional far left socialist organization. DButch (talk) 03:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

DButch, the Washington Post is a reliable source, even though it tells you truths you do not want to hear. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:11, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. An incredibly cringeworthy sentence to see on a Wikipedia article.--FollowTheSigns (talk) 13:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

This article reads as if it were prepared by the Democrat National Party. What happened to the (false notion of a) neutral stance that Wikipedia prides itself in? Kfander 20:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfander (talk • contribs)

Some people want to see Washington Post references replaced with Breitbart and Gateway Pundit references. Strange times in America. Oh, and DButch, whether something is false or a conspiracy theory is not subjective. Neither is whether Don Trump Jr. is known to promote such things. Hope this helps. DrewtheShrew (talk) 04:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


  • == To much bias, very op-ed ==

The references chosen are not factual but very op-ed style. The composition of the wiki page itself contain very little fact and instead more of a political persusasive article. Freefireflies (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Specific examples would be helpful. DrewtheShrew (talk) 03:58, 11 June 2020 (UTC) This is the most opinionated biased garbage I've ever seen on Wikipedia. Citations developed using opinionated material do not constitute fact. Frankly, by allowing this tabloid-ish type of material to be published as a factual resource is exactly why Wikipedia can not gain a respected position within the Field of Education in our schools. I love Wikipedia, and have defended the brilliance behind the creation of an encyclopedia that is essentially a "living document". However, updated submissions should be factual, bias-free, informative material if Wikipedia is to ever be taken seriously as a credible resource. How this type of material made it though the review process is a mystery and a shame.

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2020

In 2018 campaign paragraph in Involvement in Politics section...

Change "was second only to his father in his ability to draw crows to draw campaign events"

To "was second only to his father in his ability to draw crowds to campaign events" DrewtheShrew (talk) 03:57, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done JTP (talk • contribs) 04:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

"DJTJ" listed at Redirects for discussion

Information icon A discussion is taking place to address the redirect DJTJ. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 19#DJTJ until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 05:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Criminal referral by the Senate removed because of WP:NOTNEWS?

Content about the Senate intel committee making a criminal referral of Trump Jr was removed with the justification WP:NOTNEWS.[4] That seems kind of absurd. It's not some minute trivia, but is rather serious and pertains to one of the topics covered at great length in this Wikipedia article (Trump Jr's role in Russian interference in the 2016 election). The content should be restored ASAP. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Emir of Wikipedia, a criminal referral from the U.S. Senate seems like a big deal, no? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
We do not need to include every news article that mentions him. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, we don't, like, for instance, this interesting piece. That isn't likely to merit inclusion per WP:NOTNEWS. What is your specific objection to including a mention of his criminal referral? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
We can wait and see if anything comes from the referral. There is WP:NORUSH. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, that's an essay, and an incredibly weak argument to make against inclusion. You haven't given any specific rationale for why to apply that in this case. I'm using my one revert for today to reinsert that valid, cited information. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
That piece is now in the article too. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
I agree this worth including. This is, obviously, quite significant. Neutralitytalk 17:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, this is suitable for the article. It is a pretty big deal. - MrX 🖋 20:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Language

'The sheep hunt and travel to Ulaanbaatar for a private meeting with Mongolian president..' is from the current page.

This is why the Germanic languages have long words. If sheephunt was spelled as one word, it would avoid any confusion about the sheeps' intention of a private meeting with.. Is there some comma or semocolon that can fix this sentence??

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.141.226 (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Should we change the main image?

This image of Trump Jr., https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Donald_Trump,_Jr._(50042560681)_(cropped).jpg on Wikimedia Commons is from June 23, 2020. I believe it should change the current main image as its closer to the present, and has a better angle of the subject overall.

Josharaujo1115 (talk) 07:14, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. PvOberstein (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Quote box

On COVID-19 death count

    "Well, why aren't they talking about deaths? Oh, oh, because the number is almost nothing. Because we've gotten control of this, and we understand how it works."

—Donald Trump, Jr., October 29, 2020
(deaths that day: "roughly 1,000")[1]

@MyPreferredUsernameWasTaken::
Of course, I disagree about "ugly" and "hideous", and your comments are the first I've heard applied to such quote boxes, though I do acknowledge that color is not something a lot of editors use in quote boxes.
Which part of WP:BLP, specifically, do you think this quote, or quote box, violates? If you have a policy-based reason, please be more specific and concrete than your edit comments have been. RCraig09 (talk) 05:08, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

P.S. The quote is notorious; I don't have to prove such for inclusion in Wikipedia; notability suffices. RCraig09 (talk) 05:09, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Forgey, Quint (October 30, 2020). "Don Jr. dismisses coronavirus deaths: 'The number is almost nothing'". Politico. Archived from the original on October 30, 2020.
My concern relates to WP:BLPBALANCE; I don't believe a quote is necessary when the article subject's subsection in relation to it is abnormally small in comparison to both the rest of his other subsections and to the other articles of those more involved with the subject matter (COVID-19). As far as I'm aware, Trump Jr. has no policy leverage, he's the son of Trump, but he isn't Ivanka Trump who does have influence on policy; his only involvement so far, as documented within the article, is his campaigning for his father and the crude statements he often makes doing so. What is the quote bringing to the article that allows the reader to better understand the subject?
The quote box itself is also of poor structure, if you wanted to make it look much nicer, it'd look something like this (taken from Star Wars article):

It's the flotsam and jetsam from the period when I was twelve years old. All the books and films and comics that I liked when I was a child. The plot is simple—good against evil—and the film is designed to be all the fun things and fantasy things I remember. The word for this movie is fun.

—George Lucas, 1977

If you wanted to include the quote within the subsection text, that's completely fine with me and you won't see any objection. My problem arises with the use of a quote box, of which I don't believe the article warrants one. MyPreferredUsernameWasTaken (talk) 14:56, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
I appreciate your reasoning re WP:BLPBALANCE, and have put the quote in narrative text. I'm not sure it's à propos to refer to "external" issues like Jr.'s degree of policy influence, but it looks like his COVID pronouncements are a small part of his overall notability at this state in this article's development. As an aside: the fullness of Template:Quote box parameters suggests approaches beyond the minimalist. Thanks for taking the time to explain. —RCraig09 (talk) 23:18, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Nypost is unreliable?

Excuse me? It's been around for decades. CNN liberal literally fabricated conspiracy theory claiming that the president of the United States had colluded with the Russian government to rigged the 2016 elections. Unless you're going to remove all links to CNN don't start removing links to the New York Post just because Joe Biden doesn't like them. That's literally against Wikipedia's mission statement of removing content that reflects negatively on a business or person — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editorman232 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

CNN is reliable. NY Post is reliable for its sports coverage, but not its coverage of politics, as evidenced by the "report" about the laptop which is not passing the sniff test. See WP:RSP for more information, such as the discussions where each WP:CONSENSUS on source reliability was discussed and formed. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
CNN is a reliable source for Wikipedia: "There is consensus that news broadcast or published by CNN is generally reliable. However, iReport consists solely of user-generated content, and talk show content should be treated as opinion pieces. Some editors consider CNN biased, though not to the extent that it affects reliability." The New York Post is unreliable and should be avoided: "There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication." Dimadick (talk) 17:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

CNN "reliable"? They were the ones who faked their reporter being under attack in Israel during the Gulf War. 172.58.139.38 (talk) 12:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Inciting the storming of the Capitol

The article has had "played a major role in inciting the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol" added to it.

The source used to support this has two mentions of the subject of the article:

Mr. Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., warmed up the audience by warning of challenges to Republican members of Congress who did not back the pro-Trump efforts: “We’re coming for you,” he said.

(The following paragraph reverts to discussing the President)

Then, later on:

Donald Trump Jr. posted a tweet urging supporters to stop the violence.

This does not seem enough to clearly support the assertion added to the article: 'challenges to Republican members of Congress' would seem to suggest political challenges. Further sources should be added to support this statement. Mauls (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Donald Trump Jr is the American Conspiracy Theorist

This lede section feels very point-of-view despite Trump Jr. promoting conspiracies. Sure he promotes conspiracies but it not is part of who he is, and the best biographies on Wikipedia don't amplify someone's lows as one of the first words in the actual biographies itself. Ovioas,wo (talk) 05:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. Reliable sources describe him as a conspiracy theorist and highlight his promotion of conspiracy theories as a significant part of his public role. Whether you think it's "part of who he is" is not relevant. --Tataral (talk) 12:19, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree that he is a far-right conspiracy theorist, although journalist point of view is best kept out of the lede section of a Wikipedia article. He has promoted dozens of conspiracies, but there aren't enough RS explicitly calling him a conspiracy theorist. It is best kept to the reader to interpret whether he is a conspiracy theorist or not. Ovioas,wo (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

"Inciting a riot"

What "Inciting a riot"? That's libel, slanderous. 172.58.139.38 (talk) 12:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

It's sourced, and it's what sources say. Thanoscar21talkcontributions 22:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

"had a key role in inciting the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol" in lede

I don't disagree with the assessment, but saying point-blank that he did have a key role in inciting the riots, while at the same time saying that an criminal investigation into charges of incitement is ongoing, seems a bit contradictory and possible WP:CRIME violation. (Additionally, the Joe Scarborough citation doesn't seem to back up the claim, merely that this is Scarborough's opinion - which if it's going to be used in the article should be attributed to him). "Has been accused of" may seem weasely, but I think it's needed here - arguably with a better source to back it up. --Bangalamania (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit: Removed for now. --Bangalamania (talk) 23:19, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Be fair- Don Jr is the subject of unverified conspiracy theories by far left wing commentators who have found no wrong doing. Apparently wikipedian admins think Hunter is squeaky clean/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:C886:A800:4123:BB89:29CF:4D8F (talk) 05:28, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Have it the same way you have Hunter Bidens page :)

Don Jr is the subject of unverified conspiracy theories by far left wing commentators. The feds have found no wrong doing legally because thats what wiki has for Hunter their favorite guy. Apparently wikipedian admins think Hunter is squeaky clean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:C886:A800:4123:BB89:29CF:4D8F (talk) 05:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 March 2021

[trump.com/leadership/donald-trump-jr-biography Link to get the official biography of Donald Trump Jr for free] 71.254.12.37 (talk) 10:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

 Fixed. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 10:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Very Subjective

"Trump has engaged in attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election following his father's electoral defeat; he has promoted the stolen election conspiracy theory and advocated "total war" instead of completion of vote counting.[11][12] He spoke at the rally that encouraged a mob to attack Congress, where he threatened Trump's opponents that "we're coming for you."[13] On January 11, 2021, D.C. attorney general Karl Racine said that he is looking at whether to charge Donald Trump Jr. with inciting the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol in the criminal investigation into the attack.[14]"

This is completely opinionated and very disingenuous since it is heavily insinuating some wrong doing on behalf of trump jr for capitol violence multiple times despite the senate ruling that trump nor anyone associated with trump "incited an insurrection". This should be removed since wikipedia isn't for people's opinions/conspiracies but to be as objective as possible by following what has actually happened. Also the very selectively cut "total war" and "we're coming for you" quotes are selectively cut to imply trump jr advocated violence, when in full context its very obvious he is using political speech protected by Brandenburg v. Ohio in a non-violent context.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.70.228.14 (talk) 03:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

There was no Senate ruling that they did NOT incite an insurrection (there was an insufficient majority for the proposed ruling that they DID to pass).96.250.80.27 (talk) 21:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2021

40 Wall Street was structurally completed in 1930 and should be removed from the list of the "building projects" that DT Jr. had charge of even if he supervised renovations. 96.250.80.27 (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:40, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2021

What you have allowed on his bio is a disgrace and completely one sided lies. It’s not objective WHATSOEVER. 75.118.66.36 (talk) 03:03, 12 August 2021 (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. ––Sirdog9002 (talk) 04:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Lead Photo

New Lead photo has shadows covering a lot of Trump's face. Recommend reverting it back to the previous lead photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Negrong502 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Storming Capitol

Donald Trump Jr. was the first member of the Trump family to condemn the violent protests taking place on Capitol. See https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1346898825491968000?s=20jr-responds-trump-supporters-storming-capi Maybe an edit in the Storming Capitol topic?83.81.228.116 (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Please fix this alt left rag hit job

Compare this page to hunter bidens page, then use your brain 47.132.251.160 (talk) 02:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Well Hunter Biden and Donald Trump Jr aren't the same person so.... – Muboshgu (talk) 02:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2021

Remove this statement: He cooperated with Russia in their interference in the 2016 United States elections


Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. (https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download) NickMcCall (talk) 10:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC) NickMcCall (talk) 10:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This will clearly be a contentious change. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Debunked info

Russian collusion in 2016 election has been debunked! Sadly, I’m not surprised Wiki still proclaims it as truth! 107.126.58.216 (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps if you watched or read something that wasn't Fox News, you would understand that it was proven. See G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia for instance. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
"At least 16 associates of Donald Trump had contacts with Russians during the 2016 campaign or transition...In the months after the election, Trump and his senior officials repeatedly denied that there had been any contact whatsoever with Russians"[5]
"This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump." Don Jr: "If it’s what you say, I love it."[6] soibangla (talk) 18:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hit piece by leftist Wikipedia

Hit piece by leftist Wikipedia.

This is one of the most unlikeable figures in American political history, yet the pettiness of the article renders him a borderline sympathetic character. With the editorializing in every other line, declaring every item in his history either a failure or a scandal of the very highest order reads like a scorned woman describing her husband's mistress. The scorned woman may have valid reasons for her anger, and the mistress's reputation may be justifiably poor, but in no sense is the evaluation anything approaching objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.209.219.223 (talk) 07:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2022

You need to change the Russian interference collusion narrative with regard to both Donald Trump and Trump Junior after the facts have come out from the recent investigation discovery that Hillary Clinton’s Campaign both attempted to frame Donald Trump and his family regarding some type of Russian collusion and interference in the election and her spying on a sitting president 2600:8805:508:1700:9834:68AA:AD40:1C04 (talk) 21:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2022

“He cooperated with Russia in their interference in the 2016 United States elections…”

—-This is absolutely false. It is refuted by The Mueller Report which found no American “colluded or coordinated” with Russia. It is outright libel.

Change to: He met with a Russian lawyer promising political information on Hillary Clinton, though no information about Clinton was ultimately provided.” 98.115.12.164 (talk) 03:38, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Severestorm28 23:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

McDonald / MacDonald typo

Another controversy arose when Trump retweeted remarks by psychologist Kevin B. MacDonald about alleged favors exchanged by Hillary Clinton and Switzerland's largest bank (McDonald has been accused of anti-semitism for some of his writings) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.237.176.7 (talk) 09:11, 11 July 2017‎ (UTC)

Proper Pronouns

According to this tweet [7] Don Jr. prefers the pronouns Zer/Zin. Please update the page. Giant Bernard (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Almost comically biased entry

The liberal bias in this article is positively grotesque. At least have the courtesy to make a *pretence* of objectivity. If your aim is to propagandize, remember - propaganda is more effective when conducted with a semblance of subtlety. Danhager (talk) 18:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Danhager, we're not a propaganda site, we reflect coverage from reliable sources. Do you have any specific comments that could actually help? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
This is not bias Cakepops4everr (talk) 00:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

It's pointless, but I'll try to engage one last time. If you can read (for example) the second and third paragraphs of this entry and not perceive bias, there is really nothing more to be said. The entire entry is simply a charge sheet, in which the subject is accused of every crime under the sun, from electoral manipulation, to racism, to misogyny. I'm surprised you overlooked his responsibility for the Great San Francisco Earthquake. I imagine Mr Trump has replied to some of your charges. Why not include some of his rebuttals, if only for balance? Then compare the tone of this entry with that addressing Hunter Biden (for example). Wikipedia, you are absurd. Danhager (talk) 18:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Danhager, I do agree with you that those two paragraphs in the lead are not written well. It looks like it was put together as events happened and should be revised for a more cohesive narrative. The content of the lead should include being Trump's son and his role in the Trump Org, and then his involvement in his father's campaigns. That should mean including his meetings with Russian-linked individuals. His rebuttals should be in the article body, I have not recently read it. Comparing DTJ to Hunter Biden is useless for us. They are both sons of POTUS, but otherwise have little in common. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 July 2022

In the Personal Life section and under the Hunting subheader it is stated that the Argali Mountain Sheep is endangered. This is incorrect as the sheep is actually near threatened. 47.6.17.135 (talk) 12:59, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 13:01, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
The Argali sheep, famous for its long horns, is considered near-threatened, according to the Red List of Threatened Species.
"Donald Trump Jr's rare sheep hunt 'cost US taxpayers $75,000'". BBC News. June 10, 2020.
-- Pemilligan (talk) 16:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Bends in one direction, misleading

It seems this information is bended in one direction. Its been proven time and time again that "sources" like cnn have lied and had to retract stories on numerous occasions. Why these type of "sources" are used is beyond common sense thinking. The entire tv and print news industry is owned by 7 corporations! It's all scripted and proven. And this far right crap is getting redundantly ridiculous. They're not far right. The far right were the nazi's. Learn history before throwing that word around so loosely! You keep asking for donations, why? You actively let people write and cite garbage articles that only lean in one direction! It's misleading to people that don't know any differently. So, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! And no, I get All politicians, and the wealthy are corrupt in some form, but then again so are you for allowing this garbage to remain on your site! You fall right in line with the globalist that want to stop people from being free thinkers, a free society, free liberties, free speech. Why can't we just live and let live? You be you and me be me? Stop throwing garbage down everyone's throat! I'm not asking anyone to like my opinion, so don't ask me to like yours. The whole world is watching and they don't like it either! Over a million people in that past couple months switched their voter registration from Democrat to Republican. Your pushing your own people away! Wake up people before we lose our FREEDOMS FOREVER!!! If you don't think it can happen, ask the civilians in Australia, England, Germany, France, Iraq, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, China, North Korea....basically the rest of the world! Just watch interviews with people that grew up in Cuba! They are scared as hell to what's happening in the USA. Even Pitbull has concerns as that's where he grew up. Knowledge is power! 2600:1008:B106:FE6E:44A1:6ECB:BDF4:F173 (talk) 19:35, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

How about giving specific examples of how to improve the article. For example, here's one: The article says that Trump, Jr. was complicit in the Russian Election and links to another article. However, in that linked article it was mentioned that "there was insufficient evidence to bring any conspiracy or coordination charges against Trump or his associates".
The article also said Trump, Jr. met with Alexander Torshin at an event. But anyone in business knows that lower executives take meetings all the time to hear pitches, and it has no bearing on whether they were cooperating and had eventually brokered a deal. Again, no evidence.
Trump Jr. is a politically charged figure, sure. But it would make Wikipedia a much more useful resource if it focused on facts and abstained from political editorial. 36.226.162.125 (talk) 07:19, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

You feel any better? Tyrone (talk) 11:51, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

It seems like you went on an unhinged rant without telling us how to specifically improve this article. Tyrone (talk) 11:52, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

"Even Pitbull has concerns" A dog has political concerns? Dimadick (talk) 06:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)


Don trump jr

This wiki page is so obviously slanted with lies and misinformation 148.74.195.35 (talk) 00:16, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Name a lie. Or misinformation. Be specific. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
I agree that simply quoting a media source is not indemnity to posting the quote as fact. This is how the whole Russian Trump conspiracy thing was manufactured and backed by paid off members of the Biden White House. That is, just because the National Enquirer headlines that Michael J Fox impregnated aliens from outer space does not mean that it is so. It just means that a media publication printed it. Tha facts and the liability of alleged actions of famous people and the consequences for promoting said fiction is on the heads of the owners of the websites. 64.67.94.113 (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
When damages occur from service contractors of major corporations, the damages are paid by court order by the service contractors, usually not by the hiring corporation. Wikipedia is a de facto service contractor printing and promoting whatever is originally sourced from other media. The other media is not at fault for damages, but rather the most recent service contractor (Wikipedia) which prints the alleged conspiracies and liable. Therefore I would first be damned sure that what I put into public print as gospel is verified and true by concrete evidence and facts, not just who are partisan. 64.67.94.113 (talk) 20:09, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
"the whole Russian Trump conspiracy thing" was caused by Trump's own suspicious actions and lies and the secretive contacts by his campaign members in multiple European countries with known Russian spies. (If you don't know about that, then just ask, because we describe it in our articles here.) Those actions created justified suspicions and triggered justified investigations. Mueller was not able to prove "conspiracy", largely because Trump obstructed investigations and there was destruction of evidence and the use of communication devices that destroy evidence or leave no trace. His campaign acted very suspiciously, even trying to set up back-channel communications with Russia that American intelligence could not monitor. That's so wrong. Mueller certainly did find lots of active and passive cooperation between the Russians and Trump, Don Jr., and multiple campaign members, resulting in many convictions. Trump then pardoned the wrongdoers. So blame Trump. He's not innocent.
Drop the talk about "paid off government conspirators". Unless there is solid proof, we assume good faith in our editors, and casting aspersions against them is not allowed.
Wikipedia does not use junk sources like the National Enquirer, Breitbart, OANN, Newsmax, etc. We use reliable sources and attribute any controversial opinions to the source.
Wikipedia and its editors cannot, by law, be held liable for republishing libelous or potentially libelous content published on the internet. See Barrett v. Rosenthal. Only the original creator of the libel can be held liable.
If you are alleging there is a problem with our content, then say it clearly and specifically, using exact quotes, and then provide reliable sources to back your allegation, as what you say has no authority here. Only reliable sources mean anything to us. Otherwise, you risk violating WP:NOTFORUM and your comments will just get deleted. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:20, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Donald_Trump_Jr./Archive_1&oldid=1207104640"