Talk:George Bush

Old, unsectioned comments

Hmm, should this be a disambiguation page? pointing to either George HW Bush or George W Bush

-sv

Not in my opinion. This one is always called "George Bush" and the other one is always called "George W Bush" - they disambiguate themselves. --Camembert

The other one is not always called George W. Bush - I've heard him called George Bush often enough. See, for example, Environmentalism and George Bush, which refers to Bush fils, not Bush père. - Montréalais

OK, "always" is too strong (almost nothing is "always"), but "usually" seems about right. In any case, as there's a disambig block at the top of this page, we're fine as we are, I think. --Camembert

within wikipedia,plenty of links to this page mean to link to Bush the Younger, and this will surely only increase as his presidency continues. I'd support making this a disambig page.

Making this a disambiguation page would be a great mistake. W is known as George W. Bush and his father is known as George Bush. The same is true for John Adams and John Quincy Adams - if anybody makes a link to John Adams intending to link to his son, then they have made a mistake. Same for the George's. This is natural disambiguation at its best. It is enough to simply mention in the first paragraph the Sr is the father of W. If you really want to get fancy then make a disambiguation block at the top of this article. Oh wait - that has already been done. So why is there a need for full disambiguation then? --mav

• • • But [[John Adams]'s full name was John Adams while George Bush's is George H. W. Bush. And increasingly, his son is being called George Bush, unlike the days of his presidential campaign when the "W" was emphasized. Jiang

Suppose I read an article that links to this page. Now currently I don't know if that article is linking to the correct George Bush or not - it could have just been a speculative link, for example, and it can be hard to verify whether the information is correct. If this was a disambig page, then I know that every time I get a link here then I'm following a speculative link - and these speculative links can be easily found and corrected. That makes wikipedia self-verifying and self-correcting, which is a good thing.

John Adams is 200 years old, and is part of history, and the naming conventions are well-established. George Bush is part of current events, and currently people (in the UK) talking of "George Bush" almost invariably mean the current president. The elder Bush currently only gets a mention in terms of his currenly more famous son, in terms of "former president George Bush" or "his father" or similar. Martin

I still don't agree, but I don't disagree enough to care so long as each and every link to this page is fixed first. The elder Bush isn't mentioned enough anymore to make free linking that much more difficult. --mav

It's only 3-2 in favour so far, including myself, so I'm not going to do anything without some agreement.

Of course, I could put info on the elder Bush at George H. W. Bush and then redirect George Bush there. No idea if that'd be better or worse. ~~

I agree with Jiang, and as time goes by his argument will gain potency. If the 21st century's first U.S. president continues to make a name for himself, at some point the unmarked term George Bush will start to refer to the son, while the father will start to be better known as George H. W. Bush or "Bush Senior" or the like. I'm not sure we've reached that point yet, but I'm pretty sure we will reach it sooner or later. Uncle Ed 15:45 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

See wikipedia:disambiguation

Case in point: [[1]]

• George W. Bush is being referred to as simply George Bush

---

JohnOwens wrote (I'm not sure it counts as "skydiving" if you're doing it to save your butt.)

He had to jump out of a plane - after leaving office - to save his own butt? -Jazz77

---

I changed the referrence to the bar scanner story to "apocryphal" - according to a number of otherwise reliable sources (see http://www.snopes.com/history/american/bushscan.htm ), it was concocted from a visit to a technology conference, where Bush was politely interested in how these worked. It was then picked up and used by many writers. (incidentally - I made this error myself, see http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/e_andersen_6.html )

---

I think we should move this page to "George H. W. Bush" because it has been common usage to also refer to his son as "George Bush." This would clear any confusion as to which George Bush we would be referring to. It would also be more consistent to recognize the middle names of both. Yes, his son is also George Bush (even though he has a "W" in between). This George Bush has an "H. W."--same thing! Jiang

If George Bush remains a redirect to George H. W. Bush then that is OK. Better yet would be for somebody to fix all the links here to either point to Bush the elder or Bush the younger and have this be a disambiguation page. Not something I'm willing to do at the moment. --mav 01:08 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Hmm, it's the other way around, George H. W. Bush is a redirect to George Bush... it probably would be better to have the article on G.B. senior at George H. W. Bush, wouldn't it? Evercat 01:15 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Mav, fixing all the links would take a lot of time; there are dozens of 'em. Let's wait a couple of months, and if a consensus emerges by then I will be happy to undertake the task, in the way you direct.

Quiz of the day: which Lord of the Rings character was described as "very good, always helps"? (Bonus question: who worded the description that way?) --Uncle Ed 15:52 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I've spent the past day changing the "George Bush" in many articles to "George H. W. Bush". I probably missed a sizeable number of them. I think we should switch the articles as a temporary measure (move this article to "George H. W. Bush") and have this one redirect there. The disambiguation page can be made later on.Jiang 17:44 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

If enough of us whittle away at the ambiguous links to "George Bush" (most can be resolved by the date of the context), we could be ready to change this around in about a week. I just sorted out seven. The Anome 12:21 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Progress report: There are now just 67 references from non-talk pages to "George Bush" without specifying which one. If just ten are fixed each day, the job will be complete within a week. The Anome 09:48 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Progress report: There are now less than thirty ambiguous article-space Bushes left. The Anome

Progress report: There are now less than ten ambiguous article-space Bushes left. The Anome

Progress report: Now there's only one, Jorge Ramos, because I didn't know which it was supposed to point to... Evercat 19:23 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Cool, the last one's been taken care of. Unless there are any last-minute objections, and since we seem to have won the vote, I'll move the page to George H. W. Bush, create the disambiguation page and fix the redirects. Evercat 19:47 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yay! The Anome 19:47 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

Im a little confused why George Bush was redirected to George H. W. Bush. If anything, it should point to the current President. Pizza Puzzle

the only reason why it redirected to the old president is that that was the page that was here before, whereas the current presidents page has allways been at its current place. the redirect was only there to alow time for the pages to be moved (v badly explained)

Reversion?

Why the reversion of the 'As of' link?! Troll Silent, Troll Deep 19:18, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

When I searched for George bush I got this page asking which one I was refering to. When I clicked on George W. Bush it routed me to "Retarded."

I tried to fix it but I couldn't figure out how. Just thought you guys should know. -anon

Protect this page

I think this page should be protected from editing. It keeps getting vandalized and it is unlikely that many more George Bush's (Bushes?) will show up anytime soon. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rob van Stee (talk • contribs) 11:58, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I've protected it just for a short while. There are good reasons to not permanently protect, such as permitting people to add interwiki links, move the page to a different name such as George Bush (disambiguation), and so on. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 13:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be a redirect or disambiguation?

Well? 92.0.238.159 (talk) 21:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

• It should be wahat it is - a disambiguation page with a large number of entries. Boleyn (talk) 22:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Expanded names

{{edit protected}}

The names should be expanded in the description after the page link.

• George Walker Bush
• George Herbert Walker Bush
• George Prescott Bush

76.66.195.159 (talk) 07:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

This page is semiprotected; any username more than a few days old can edit it. There is no need for administrator assistance to edit this page. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

{{edit-semiprotected}}

Done -Unpopular Opinion (talk · contribs) 10:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Higher protection level?

As there is little need to edit page - it's a well-written dab and unlikely there are many future additions - could it get a higher level of protection? It's been awful lately - I hoped it would stop when he left office. Boleyn (talk) 09:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it's been vandalized again. 131.202.240.239 (talk) 11:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)