Jump to content

Talk:Kamala Harris

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

    RFC: How to refer to the African ancestry of Kamala Harris?

    [edit]

    Which of the following should we use to refer to Kamala Harris when discussing her African ancestry:

    • African-American
    • Black

    Note: There are cases where she may be referred to as Asian-American either alone or with one of the above two. This RfC is only about her African ancestry as that has been the greatest area of contention. This does not apply to quotes. You will find a lengthy discussion on the subject above at:[1]. --O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Her father is Jamaican American
    Her Mother is Indian American.
    Why does Kamalas Wikipedia Page say she's African American. 38.188.135.157 (talk) 04:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please do some reading before posting. For example, see "Why does Wikipedia say..." at the top of this page. Johnuniq (talk) 05:22, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    African-American and Asian-American are best references in my opinion. She is American (born in California). The terms African and Asian best describe her ethnic connections. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 08:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    If Black, please indicate capitalization preference so we don't have to have a second RfC. Also, try to keep responses in the Survey section reasonably brief. The Discussion section can be used for more detailed responses. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Survey

    [edit]
    • Both. They're not mutually exclusive. Might remove the "when talking about her African ancestry" part of the question, as the context in which each are used can be complicated. IMO the question is really more about how to thoughtfully present both, and how doing so in the lead might differ from the body of the article. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      +1 Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Black - To reiterate what I've said in the discussion above, most news sources now use Black to describe Harris and the most recent official websites use Black:
    • WhiteHouse.gov says "On January 20, 2021, Kamala Harris was sworn in as Vice President – the first woman, the first Black American, and the first South Asian American to be elected to this position."
    • KamalaHarris.com says "Throughout her life, she’s broken barriers, and she’s now the first woman, first Black American, and first South Asian American to serve as vice president."
    List of other sources discussed above
    The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

    Black:

    • BBC - "first woman as well as the first black and Asian-American to serve as vice-president"
    • AP News - "Harris is the first woman, Black person and person of South Asian descent to serve as vice president."
    • Pew Research - "She became the first female vice president, as well as the first Black person and first Asian American to hold that office."
    • ABC News - "become the first Black woman and the first person of South Asian descent to head a major party's presidential ticket after President Joe Biden’s ended his reelection bid"
    • New York Times
    • NPR - "after all, she's Black and Asian and South Asian and Indian American."
    • NPR again - "in addition to being the first Black or Asian American person in the position."
    • CNN - "Harris is the first woman to become vice president, as well as the first Black or Asian American person to hold the office."
    • CNN again
    • NBC News - "nation's first female vice president, as well as the first Black American and first person of South Asian descent."
    • Reuters - "The attacks on Kamala Harris, the first woman and first Black and South Asian person to serve as U.S. vice president, have intensified in the days since she consolidated support to become Democrats' likely presidential nominee."
    • Locke, T., & Joseph, R. L. (2021). All intersectionality is not the same: Why Kamala Harris is our vice president and not Stacey Abrams. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 107(4), 451–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2021.1983197
    • Clayton, K., Crabtree, C., & Horiuchi, Y. (2023). Do Identity Frames Impact Support for Multiracial Candidates? The Case of Kamala Harris. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 10(1), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2021.33
    • Filindra, Alexandra, and E. J. Fagan. 2022. “ Black, Immigrant, or Woman? The Implicit Influence of Kamala Harris' Vice Presidential Nomination on Support for Biden in 2020.” Social Science Quarterly. 103: 892–906. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13162
    • Ma, D.S., Hohl, D. & Kantner, J. The politics of identity: The unexpected role of political orientation on racial categorizations of Kamala Harris. Anal Soc Issues Public Policy. 2021; 21: 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12257
    • FactCheck.org - "Harris Has Always Identified as Indian American and Black"

    African American:

    • CBS News
    • CA.gov
    • USA Today
    • " Kamala Harris became the first African American vice president of the United States ...", Statistical Thinking: Analyzing Data in an Uncertain World, Princeton University Press, 2023, p. 78.
    • "Kamala Harris his running mate, thus giving her the opportunity to become the first African American vice president in American history." , Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in the Free Market Era, Oxford University Press, 2022, p. 286.
    • " Kamala Harris the first woman, the first African American, ... to serve as vice president." Winds of Hope, Storms of Discord: The United States since 1945, Cambridge University Press, 2022, p. 486
    • "Vice President Kamala Harris's ascension as the country's first woman (and African American) to assume the number two position in the White House." Race and National Security, Oxford University Press, p.
    • "Celebrating America's arrival as a desirable "post-racial" ideal has been somewhat reinvigorated by America's first African Asian vice president, Kamala Harris." Discounting Life: Necropolitical Law, Culture, and the Long War on Terror], Cambridge University Press, 2022, p. 118.
    • "Senator Cory Booker and Senator Kamala Harris are African American", The Point of No Return: American Democracy at the Crossroads, Princeton University Press, 2023, p. 202.
    • "Right-wing critics ready to pounce on all things Harris—the first vice presidential candidate with African American lineage—were quick to contradict and condemn her ...", Trash Talk: Anti-Obama Lore and Race in the Twenty-first Century, University of California Press, p. 129
    • African-American women are unrelentingly conceptualized as the embodied salvation of national political parties, most predominantly in Joe Biden's selection of Kamala Harris as his vice president ...," The Divided States: Unraveling National Identities in the Twenty-First Century , University of Wisconsin Press, 2023, p. 44.
    • "In 2020, Biden was elected president, and Harris became the first woman, and the first woman of 'African and South Asian descent, to be elected vice president of the United States." Making the World a Better Place: African American Women Advocates, Activists, and Leaders, 1773-1900, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2023.
    • "This chapter explores the stony road African American women have walked, from ... to the ascendancy of Kamala Harris, the first African American woman Vice President." (Identity Politics in US National Elections, Springer, 2023.
    • "Kamala Harris, as the highest-ranking woman official in US history, as well as the first African American and first Asian American vice president of the United States," Barbara Jordan and the Politics of Scripture, Georgetown University Press, 2022.
    • "In the person of Kamala Harris, the first woman, the first Asian-American and first African American Vice president was elected—a historic breakthrough ...", The Battle for the White House: The US Presidential Election 2020 under the impression of Polarization, Coronavirus Pandemic and Social Tensions, Springer, 2022, p. 156.
    • "It is also historic because Kamala Harris became the first woman vice-president and the first African-American and Asian-American vice-president." Politics of Racism Beyond Nations: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Crises, Springer, p. 235.
    • "the first African American and South Asian woman vice president Kamala Harris. ", Religious Rhetoric in US Right-Wing Politics: Donald Trump, Intergroup Threat, and Nationalism, Springer Nature, 2022, p. 14.
    • "Although Ms Harris was received with excitement and enthusiasm by many as the first woman, the first African American, and the first Asian to be nominated for and elected to this high office ...," Managing Diversity: Toward a Globally Inclusive Workplace, SAGE, 2022, p. 158.
    • "Kamala Harris as his running mate, he positioned her to serve as the not only the first woman but also the first African American, and Asian American vice president in American history," Mass Media and American Politics, CQ Press, the historic collection of workings of the US Congress., 2022, p. 343.

    Both:

    The strange insistence on either textbooks or some other specific sources does not square with WP:V or WP:RS. Self-identification is key to our handling of race, gender, sexuality, disability, etc. and the two main official websites about Harris use Black. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Off-topic query, now anwered
    Please no collapsed lists here. Create them elsewhere and link them, as I have done. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:39, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please remove the references to African American that were already in my list. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You seem to have reproduced my quotes in the length in which they appeared in my list. This is a little distressing. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fowler&fowler - There is no rule against collapsed lists. As the list's title says, I've included other sources discussed above, including the African American ones you mentioned. I copy-pasted them verbatim so readers can see a full list. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • African-American in the first paragraph of the lead, followed by Black in the second paragraph (as in the current lead). This means I am happy with what has been the status quo for the last three years and 10 months. Here are my reasons:
    • On all her official websites from December 2003 until December 2020 she used "African American" to describe her paternal ethnicity:
    • District Attorney of San Francisco, December 2003 to December 2010: "About us":"In December 2003, Kamala D. Harris was elected as the first woman District Attorney in San Francisco's history and the first African American woman in California’s history to hold the office."
    • California Attorney General, December 2010 to December 2016: About the AG: "She is the first woman, the first African American, and the first South Asian to hold the office in the history of California."
    • U.S. Senator January 2017 to January 2021: About Kamala," Harris was the first African-American and first woman to serve as Attorney General of California and the second African-American woman to be elected to the United States Senate in history.
    • After January 2021:
    • Although her subpage on Joe Biden's White House websie) describes her to be the first "Black American" Vice President, it is not at all clear judging from the overblown language used, who has written the page, the White House PR team or Kamala Harris.
    • However, the US Senate, whose President she is, continues to describe her as: "2021, January 20 Kamala Harris of Los Angeles became the first woman and the first African American and Asian American to serve as vice president of the United States and president of the U.S. Senate" (scroll all the way to the right here)
    Follow up to Yopienso's helpful remarks
    You seem to have misread and misinterpreted Harris's report about her visit to Zambia. Either that, or you accidentally linked to the wrong report. YoPienso (talk) 21:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    She is talking there about her earlier visit to Ghana. It is that part I am referring to, to the Door of No Return, etc. I have to take my cat out to the doc's but will take another look upon my return. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:41, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, I'm back @Yopienso:. I'll take a look and fix it. Thanks for noticing. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed. See above. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:02, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome, and thanks. There are still some discrepancies, though.
    The document you linked to never once says "African American" or "Black."
    Wrt whether "Kamala Harris herself prefers the label "Black,'" here's another document about that trip. In a speech to Ghanaian youth given at the Black Star Gate on March 28, 2023, she said, "...this continent, of course, has a special significance for me personally as the first Black Vice President of the United States of America." [Emphasis added.]
    Now, that doesn't necessarily show a preference, but it's a prime example of her recent usage.
    I don't find where she "explicitly identifies with the descendants of those who survived the Middle Passage." She visited the Black Star Gate in Accra as a tourist, making no mention of any ancestor who passed through it or any of the 40 or so similar gates across western Africa. I suspect she doesn't know her father's genealogy many generations back.
    Maybe it doesn't matter much if we use "African American" or "Black," which are commonly used synonymously. YoPienso (talk) 01:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't speak to what she said elsewhere, but in the conversation I've referenced she very much considers herself to be a descendent of people who endured the Middle Passage, for this is how that excerpted conversation ends:

    THE VICE PRESIDENT: And what we should do then to also celebrate the strength of our people to come through that and go on to be astronauts. I just spoke yesterday with Astronaut Glover. Do you guys know who he is? (Laughs.) (Applause.) He’s about to go on the Artemis II mission to circle the Moon. I just talked to him yesterday. Right? And so, the scientists and the astronauts and the mathematicians and all of the people — MS. NABONGO: And the Vice President. THE VICE PRESIDENT: — and the Vice President of the United States. (Laughs.) (Applause.) Right.

    As far as I'm aware, the term African American as envisaged by the people who originally created it was a reference to the Middle Passage Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, the interviewer interrupted and included her, and Harris then repeated the interviewer's words. YoPienso (talk) 12:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But she agreed and had used "us" and "our people" before. She was being modest. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    {{re|@Yopienso: I am collapsing this, so it doesn't distract other participants. Thanks for your helpful comments. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I really appreciate your friendliness. My view isn't that Harris was being modest--why would a politician be modest? She was being gracious with the interviewer, an increasingly rare quality. You can tell by the fact she laughed and then said "Right" that in the moment she wasn't thinking about including herself.
    I'm not sure I want all my comments hidden, particularly this:
    Wrt whether "Kamala Harris herself prefers the label "Black,'" here's another document about that trip. In a speech to Ghanaian youth given at the Black Star Gate on March 28, 2023, she said, "...this continent, of course, has a special significance for me personally as the first Black Vice President of the United States of America." [Emphasis added.] 
    Now, that doesn't necessarily show a preference, but it's a prime example of her recent usage.
    

    How can we give those lines visibility? Between you and me, I'm concluding that we're wasting our time here. "Black American," "Black," and "African American" mean almost the same thing. They do generally mean exactly the same thing; the difference lies in the speaker's and hearer's personal opinions. "Jamaican" or "Jamaican American" would work just as well. Same for Asian. I much prefer South Asian to the much broader "Asian," which often conjures images of China, Japan, and Korea. Far better would be to use "Indian." It's been a pleasure working with you because you've been so civil. Just a friendly hint here: Be sure not to cross the line into WP:OWN. YoPienso (talk) 16:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see the need for a note. The current wording is fine, with AA in the first paragraph and B in the second. Binksternet (talk) 14:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Black and Asian American (my preference is Black Asian American, or just Black for brevity). This aligns with what it says at her own website and the White House website. Apparently, it's what she wants and what her PR people want, as she and they both had to sign off on those descriptors. Media often get things wrong, so I think we should go to and rely on the primary source(s): Kamala Harris and the people who promote her and speak for her officially. It's at both of those places online where she's told us who she is. Why would we want to call her anything else? A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 22:30, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    *:But for 16 years before that, as Senator, California AG, District Attorney SF, her previous media people identified her as African-American. See my statement above. So, is WP a tool of the media PR people, and if so, of which version of a subject's changeable identity? How do the last four trump over the previous 16? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC) Corrected in light of @Objective3000:'s remark below. Apologies. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • is WP a tool of the media people Would you please stop this? Media have their own editorial rules. In earlier days, African-American became popular because older terms were heavily frowned upon, including the term Black before they owned it. Go back far enough, it was "colored". I remember the waiting room and water fountain signs. Then was then, Now is now. Let people be called what they want to be called, as long as it has a legitimate foundation, whether it be race, sexual identity, gender, etc. Trump was ranting today that she just turned Black. Let us not be his "tool". O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Again, let's not stay stuck in the past. Let's use the terminology Ms. Harris uses.
      We could always say in the lead that she's a "person of color" and then use African American and Black throughout the article. (I realize there's a good argument that the two terms aren't interchangeable, but it seems they're often used as synonyms.)
      That said, in 2019, when she was running for the 2020 nomination, Politico quoted her as saying, "I am black and I am proud of it. [...] I was born black and I’ll die black and I am proud of it. And I am not gonna make any excuses for it, for anybody, because they don’t understand." YoPienso (talk) 01:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • African-American or Black American - black is very informal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astropulse (talkcontribs) 04:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I do agree with you that "Black" is more informal than African American. It is one of the reasons the US Senate calls its list: African American Senators. It includes Kamala Harris.
      Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Mmm, and then we have the Congressional Black Caucus, the HBCUs, the NABJ, the Association of Black Psychologists, etc.--all formal.
      Couldn't we agree that colored, Negro, Afro-American, Black, African American, all mean the same thing? They just arose from different times and places.
      (I'm aware that "colored" "color" as used in person of color now includes just about everyone who's not white, but I'm referring to "colored" as in the NAACP.) YoPienso (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      The word colored is considered highly offensive. Rep. Eli Crane used the word on the House floor a couple weeks ago. It was stricken from the record.[2] The NAACP chose the term "colored" for its name because it was the most positive description commonly used in 1909. More common words back then were and are far more offensive, but still used by many people today. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I think you might be confusing it with person of color, which is not the same thing – macaddct1984 (talk | contribs) 20:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Objective3000: @Macaddct1984:
      I was speaking historically, starting with colored, and I specifically referred to the NAACP. I also said the names arose from different times and places. It's exactly my point that it was the preferred term at the time. (Surely you noticed I omitted the most common term I heard when I was young.)
      I wasn't exactly sure where to put Black in the list, since "Black is beautiful" was a slogan before Afro-American morphed into African American, IIRC, but now since the Black Lives Matter movement began, "Black" seems more popular than "African American."
      I'm well aware of POC, which indeed is not the same as colored. I should have been more precise, and will correct that to avoid offense. YoPienso (talk) 23:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I understand. Speaking historically myself, I remember my teen years when the "whites only" signs were prevalent along with the "colored" signs. The public swimming pool was whites only, as well as the public schools I had to go to, a whites only school, and the sundown laws said all Blacks must cross the tracks before sundown. I could rant for an hour on other problems in my city alone. My point is that, at the very least, we should allow these people to self-identify and not be forced to accept the labels put upon them by others. And before someone says RGW, No, I am striving for neutrality and balance in a BLP. How can we document a current presidential candidate by changing the wording that she uses about herself? It's not like she is claiming she has done more for Blacks than any president since Abraham Lincoln (as another candidate just claimed). She just wants, and has wanted for a long time (BA from a Black college, pledged to a Black sorority) as Black. Who are we to change that? Appolgies for the rant. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Thank you. We must be about the same age. I attended segregated schools until I was in the 7th grade, and the integration was NOT seamless.
      AFAIK, my list of words were all chosen by the people they describe(d). Every decade or so I've done my best to accept and use the term du jour. That's why on this page I've repeatedly said older RSs (more than 2 years old, I'll now say, or maybe even one year) aren't the best; we have to look at what Ms. Harris calls herself now, which seems to be "Black."
      What's RGW? YoPienso (talk) 01:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Status Quo, as no good argument has been made for a change to the article, I see no reason to change it. Ther is no controversy in RS about her ethnicity, this is a manufactured controversy here. This is wp:falsebalance, her self-identification has not actually been challenged by RS,so there is not need for us to challenge it, it's not controversial. Slatersteven (talk) 10:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As evidenced by her own words (quoted just above), her own webpage and the White House webpage, her self-identification is Black and Asian American. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 13:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I must have missed where she says "I am not African American", please quote it for me. Slatersteven (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You want the article subject to prove you wrong, to prove that your preferred definition of her is inaccurate? I don't think that's how it's supposed to work, is it? A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 14:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No I want you to address the point I made. She has identified as African American, RS has identified her as African American. No one has said she is not African American. Just as we can say water is wet (even if you can find a source that does not say "water is wet"), so just finding a source that does not say "African American" does not mean its a contested claim. There is no controversy. Slatersteven (talk) 14:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Slatersteven - I'm sorry for replying late and I'm even more sorry if this issue has been resolved but if I could have my two cents in: I agree with you and vote to keep the status quo. I never knew this would be such an issue. If a source says she's "Black" or there's a specific context, then it should be noted in the quote or wherever the context is fit on her article, but otherwise, I don't see what's wrong with calling her "African-American" given how she has identified as such and has been described as such (though this may depend on source). And said term is also considered more formal, no?
    I know many are citing varying sources and how the terms "African-American", "Black" and "Black American" shouldn't all be conflated, or how this topic is solely about her African ancestry and not her South Asian-born mother. But if I may make a point: Harris has also described her Tamil Indian mother as a "Brown woman" (though "Brown" is not an official U.S census category, it's often used informally to denote people who are not considered "white" or "black" in America)[3] [Kamala Harris:] She was a brown woman". This, in addition to her mother being variously called "Indian", "Tamil Indian", "South Asian", "(South) Asian-American", and whatever other descriptors.
    Clearly sources clearly differ and use various terminology deemed fit by herself or others. I again, do not see what's wrong with primarily calling her "African-American" and not bouncing back and fourth every other sentence or bringing this up constantly on her talk page. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 01:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Black-ish When quoting a source, use what the source says. Otherwise use Black as that is her self-description. Considering the past treatment of minorities, self-description in cases of race, gender, sexuality, disability, is an important neutralizer. Of course it has to be accurate, not a self-description like ‘most healthy president in history’. Also capitalize Black. There was a lengthy discussion about this elsewhere on WP some months ago. A few days ago, EvergreenFir changed African-American to Black in the lead sentence: She is the first female vice president and the highest-ranking female official in U.S. history, as well as the first African American and first Asian American vice president. It was reverted back to Afro-American. The citation is[4], the official page on her at the White House site. That official page says Black American, not Afro-American. Why would we misquote this? EvergreenFir’s correction should be changed back to Black now, instead of waiting for RfC close. O3000, Ret. (talk) 15:53, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      African American had been in the lead (a result of the previous RfC) from January 2021 until very recently when it was changed without consensus. What is in place now is the longstanding consensus version. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Your repetitive mention of that RfC is highly misleading. It did not have Black as an option and wasn't about Black vs. Afro-American. What is in place now is not what is in the citation provided, a page in an official White House site about VP Harris. If we are going to use citations, we should say what they say, not an editor's opinion about what they should say. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      From 11 November 2020 until 29 July 2024, when EvergreenFir made the change, and from 30 July 2024 when it was reverted (with edit summary: "reverting lead change without consensus") until now, the lead of this page has always used "African American." That is three years and 9 months. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      So it should be corrected per the citation, the official White House site on her. If we look at the most common term used for Blacks since 1492, we would be using a term I will not repeat. O3000, Ret. (talk) 12:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Errr call me stupid, but what's the difference? Af-Am is more formal, as is "European" or "of European descent", while 'black' is slightly more colloquial, as is 'white'. Neither is any longer derogatory or excessively informal. If she herself is happy to be called 'black', who are we to argue? Whether to capitalise should be decided by the MOS, though I'm not sure what that would say. Incidentally, Obama himself sometimes uses the terms interchangably, and I've heard (and read) him describe himself as 'black'.Pincrete (talk) 17:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Pincrete: The difference is that in the Wikipedia pages of all the other major Black office holders from before emancipation until now, including KH, the first mention of the ethnicity in the lead is "African American." See my statement. I'm sure most have referred to themselves now and then as Black. The first mention is in formal language. Later, in the KH page's lead's second paragraph, we use Black. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • African-American at first use, Blacktherafter. Both terms appear to be almost equally sourced/used, with a slight preference for AA in more formal contexts, and Black in colloquial ones, and her own use. Apart from considerations of formality and her personal preference, AA is more precise. In the UK, 'Black' is most often used to refer to African-Caribbean and/or direct African ancestry, but it has also been commonly used for all non-Europeans. In Australasia I believe, it is commonly used for the descendants of indigenous peoples there. While I agree with the general principle of self-identification in such matters, when neither term has been objected to by KH, and when sources use both, being precise trumps (no pun intended) the language she herself uses when addressing a US audience. We should follow whatever MOS says about capitalisation, I can see the arguments both way on that as the term, when used about ancestry, is not being used in its ordinary adjectival sense. Pincrete (talk) 08:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Just saying...we should not use "blacktherafter". I'm pretty sure that refers to someone with a bucket of tar weatherproofing the ceiling of an old church. GMGtalk 11:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Both - as I already outlined in the earlier discussion prior to the RFC - The previous RfC from 2021 centered on the topic of whether to include her race/ethnicity at all, it didn't explicitly list Black as an option. Per MOS:IDENTITY we follow reliable self-identification and as such sources such as her whitehouse.gov profile and her ongoing Presidential political campaign self-identification are most recent on the matter, which indicate she uses the term Black American and South Asian American most recently and we should prefer it as such for top level per our MOS guidelines on preferring her self-identification if there is ambiguity - If it is unclear which is most used, use the term that the person or group uses. We can for older pieces, such as her time in California and as Senator use African American as that was the term she used at the time and as others have already noted, the two terms can be used interchangeably. Raladic (talk) 17:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Black. Today the NYT, WaPo, and CNN all referred to her as Black.
    The New York Times: "The party chair said she had won enough delegates to secure the nomination, setting up Kamala Harris to become the first Black woman and person of South Asian heritage to earn the top spot on a major political ticket for president."
    The Washington Post: "Harris becomes just the second person of color in America’s nearly 250-year history to head a major presidential ticket, after Barack Obama in 2008. Harris is Black and Indian American, and Trump has recently attacked her identity and suggested that she formerly downplayed her Black heritage, an assertion for which there is no evidence."
    CNN: "Harris, who said she will formally accept the nomination next week after the virtual roll call is complete on Monday, will become the first Black woman and first Asian American to lead a major-party ticket." YoPienso (talk) 18:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know why my comment was moved from Discussion to Survey. I've never ever seen an RfC like this one.
    I should have specified to capitalize "Black," which is how I wrote it.
    It seems so obvious to me that the term "Black" has gained momentum since Black Lives Matter started. Why are we quoting older material as examples? Why are we saying Harris used to call herself "African American" so we still must? YoPienso (talk) 19:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The reason is to separate the individual editors opinions/"votes" and have a separate Discussion section for longer discussions, or else the Survey section can get overloaded in arguments sometimes.
    You can find this detailed at the WP:RFC#Example of an RfC as a best practice on formatting Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example formatting#Separate votes from discussion.
    So responses to the RFC question go into the survey. Follow up discussions go into Discusssion. Raladic (talk) 19:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate your good-faith answer.
    The most popular kind is the kind I'm familiar with.
    This one is being run exactly the opposite of the format you linked to: "If you expect a lot of responses, consider creating a subsection, after your signature, called (for example) "Survey," where people can support or oppose, and a second sub-section called (for example) "Threaded discussion," where people can discuss the issues in depth." All the discussion here is taking place in the Survey section, and when I thought, OK, they're doing it backwards, I put my "vote" with supporting evidence in the Discussion section, and you moved it. ???? YoPienso (talk) 20:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The idea for the discussion section would be if someone has a COMMENT they would like to make (that isn't a vote), such as bring up alternative issues that the RfC didn't propose, they can be discussed in there. I've seen this separate Survey/Discussion format used a lot at WP:RSN for more complex issues. Raladic (talk) 20:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, but everybody's commenting in the Survey section! We have 3 collapsed conversations! YoPienso (talk) 20:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Black per MOS:IDENTITY, as its the term used both by the subject and recent reliable sources. (Plus, there's something to be said for shutting up all the "Jamaica is not Africa!" edit requests, even if they're wrong) --Ahecht (TALK
      PAGE
      )
      20:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      How do you know that "Black" is the term used by the subject? For on all her official web sites from 2003 (when she became SF DA) until late 2021, almost a year into her term as VP, the her official web sites all said she was the first/second African American. That's a good 19 years. What do you make of the famous anthropologist, Yolanda Moses' observation:
      • Moses, Yolanda (4 May 2021), "Kamala Harris' Refusal of the One-Drop Rule", Sapiens, Anthropology Magazine, Given this history, it matters that Harris proudly claims she sees herself as both African American and South Indian. As an anthropologist who studies inequality, I see her self-identification as a repudiation of the one-drop rule and the unjust racial hierarchy it represents.
      Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Fowler&fowler Because that's what her current official website and white house biography uses. Pointing to a 3-year-old article in which a third party says that she "sees herself as ... African American" is irrelevant because it's not recent and it's the language someone else uses to describe her claim. By that argument we should use "negra" since that what the author of this article uses. --Ahecht (TALK
      PAGE
      )
      13:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      As I've said here before @Ahecht:, "recent" on MOS is more like 40 years, not 1. See the footnote [j] in MOS:IDENTITY: In MoS's own wording, "recent", "current", "modern", and "contemporary" in reference to sources and usage should usually be interpreted as referring to reliable material published within the last forty years or so. In the consideration of name changes of persons and organizations, focus on sources from the last few years. For broader English-language usage matters, about forty years is typical.
      Her own official websites from 2003 to early 2022, all had "first African American and South Asian American Vice-President in history etc." In other words, in 19 of the last 21 years, the first mention of ethnicity in her official web pages has been African American. Only in the last two that you see "Black American," (not "Black," which seems to be your vote).Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC) Corrected Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Who are we to tell Blacks they cannot be identified as Black? O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Who are we to tell Blacks they cannot be identified as Black? We are an international encyc addressing a world audience,. We aren't attempting to regulate how a section of a US audience refers to itself, especially informally, but we have different objectives and language use. To a significant section of UK readers 'black' is a label meaning "of non-European heritage", Southall Black Sisters were almost entirely of Asian ancestry and that 'broader' use of 'black' to mean 'of colour' is still common. From that perspective, "Black and Asian American" is almost a tautology. Other countries also use 'black' with a different meaning to the US. "American Black" is slightly clearer. Pincrete (talk) 07:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Fowler&fowler Except that for "persons and organizations", footnote [j] says that recent is the last few years. --Ahecht (TALK
      PAGE
      )
      14:38, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Only for name changes @Ahecht:, not intimations of identity, especially not when her official website in the US Senate, whose president she also is, continues to use "African American," as I've indicated before. See US Senate and scroll all the way to the right. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Fowler&fowler So you're arguing that a person needs to change how they identify themselves for 40 years before we can recognize it on Wikipedia? That's absurd. The footnote is comparing "persons and organizations" (last few years) with "broader English-language usage matters" (forty years). The usage of "name" in that context obviously isn't limited to "name of the subject" and can also include "name of their identity".
      The US Senate source was last updated in 2021 and was not written by Kamala or her team (Kamala's role as "president" of the senate doesn't mean she's in charge of it, it means she presides over the legislative body).--Ahecht (TALK
      PAGE
      )
      15:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Ahecht: It says, "In the consideration of name changes of persons and organizations, focus on sources from the last few years." So in order to avail yourself of that exception to the broader rule of 40 years, are you saying she has changed her identity? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      She has changed what name she uses to identify her race/ethnicity. --Ahecht (TALK
      PAGE
      )
      17:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      African Americans can also refer to Black Americans descended from former slaves. Wisenerd (talk) 01:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Could you clarify further what you mean, @Wisenerd: Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      They're presumably referring to "American Descendants of Slavery" or ADOS. Some believe the term "African-American" should be only or primarily refer to ADOS. Or more specifically, America's black population of enslaved descent which would exclude people like Kamala (even if is a descendant of slaves, her ancestry is in Jamaica/the Caribbean, not the mainland United States).
      But I'm not sure if that's irrelevant to this discussion. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 02:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      If people are objecting to KH using African American (though I'm not sure who is) because her Afro-Jamaican ancestor was not enslaved within the US, they should be objecting even more emphatically which they are not to Barack Obama whose father most likely arrived on a Super Constellation from Kenya.
      I think the reason is probably more mundane. For 17 years KH had only Af-Am on her official website. In Joe Biden's White House, as a dutiful number two her official page is a subpage of the White House's. I wonder who has really written her page. It might be a PR team's handiwork, not her's, based on their determination that "Black" is more informal, more folksy, and thus less intimidating, to a critical number of voting age Americans than is "African American." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Black Just seems like the least contentious option. Or just leave the article as it is. This conversation seems to me to be a bit of a tempest in a teacup. What's important is who Ms. Harris is and what she stands for.Coalcity58 (talk) 20:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Follow Up Discussion

    [edit]
    • Query@Raladic: I'm afraid your interpretation,

      "The previous RfC from 2021 centered on the topic of whether to include her race/ethnicity at all, it didn't explicitly list Black as an option,"

      was not understood to be so by those who participated in it. As the closer, MelanieN, noted in her analysis at the end: As several people pointed out, this discussion is about whether to include the term “African American” in the lead in connection with being the first such person to do something. It specifically excludes using that term in the lead sentence or as a general description of her. People’s responses break down as follows: 21 people (not counting myself) supported saying “African American”. More than half cited RS and some cited her own self description. Another 8 people, including the OP, said they would be comfortable with either “African American” or “Black”. More than half cited RS and some cited her own self description. 2 people preferred “Black”. 9 people favored some other descriptor such as “Jamaican American”, “biracial”, “multi-racial”, or “person of color”. 5 people said not to use any kind of descriptor in the lead, only in the body of the article
    In other words, everyone who participated in it understood we were discussing the second sentence of the lead which states, "She is the first woman Vice President and the highest ranking female official in US history, as well as the first African-American and first Asian American Vice President. A number of admins took part and an even larger number were watching. The result was that of the 46 editors who participated, 29 were comfortable with African-American, 10 were comfortable with "Black," 9 with other descriptors and 5 were opposed to any descriptor. Why would they have mentioned these other options (Black, Afro-Jamaican, etc) if they were only voting Yes/No to "African American?" I believe your interpretation might have been made by examining the letter of the law as it might have appeared four years later, but it was not the spirit of the law that prevailed at the time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because most people don’t amend their vote after making it.
    The question of the old RfC was RfC: Should Kamala Harris be described as 'African American' in the lead?.
    But some participants later in it noted that it was missing Black as an option and added that as their own, but the voting was already ongoing.
    So my conclusion is right that the original question did not fully encompass for people to actually vote for Black as the RfC wasn’t restarted once that was added by some people as opinion. Raladic (talk) 22:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The RfC was posted at 11:56 12 August 2020.
    At 12:11 12 August 2020, The OP, Mr X, wrote, "Yes. Sources routinely describe her as African American or black (which I'm equally fine with as an alternative)."
    By 12:34 12 August 2020, CMG, the first vote after the nominator/OP, had posted, "It looks like NYT goes with black and Britannica goes with African American. I personally prefer black, since African American is most often just a euphemism for black. Nobody's gonna really pretend we'd be having this discussion about...like...an Arab dude from Morocco. But I'm not going to argue over splitting hairs there. Either one effectively communicates the information.
    Their vote was counted at "African American" or "Black." The awareness of the other options was there 38 minutes later. That is more or less off the bat. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Query @Yopienso: You say, "Today the NYT, WaPo, and CNN all referred to her as Black." But those are not examples of MOS:IDENTITY. They are descriptions of ethnicity by others. They are not descriptions of ethnicity by scholars, Wikipedia's touchstone of reliability such as these 16 academic books for the term "African-American," let alone scholarly attestations of her self-identification such as "Harris self-identifies as a Black woman of Afro-Jamaican and Indian (Tamil) ancestry."[1]

    References

    1. ^ Packer, Robert B. (2021). "Foreign Policy during and after Barack Obama". In Shaw, Todd; Brown, Robert A.; McCormick II, Joseph P. (eds.). After Obama: African American Politics in a Post-Obama Era. NYU Press. ISBN 9781479807277. LCCN 2020012642. Biden overtly considered several Black women as his vice-presidential running mates and finally selected US Senator Kamala Harris of California. Harris self-identifies as a Black woman of Afro-Jamaican and Indian (Tamil) heritage.
    If you are attempting to make the case that in a frenzied news cycle before formal nomination the outpouring of journalists attempting to beat a deadline is a better indicator of due weight on WP than scholarship, then please open a thread at WP:RS/N. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Those are examples of current RSs on top of how Harris self-identifies. The RSs are following her own usage, which we should do, too, doubly--from her preference and from the RSs.
    Also see the list of RS usages posted by EvergreenFir at 20:40, 29 July 2024. YoPienso (talk) 13:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But those are not scholarly books except the ones copied from my list (which all support African American) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is not relevant. We follow WP:RS (and in the case of identity, even primary sources for self-identification per WP:ABOUTSELF and MOS:IDENTITY), it doesn't have to be scholarly books. Raladic (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have replied below. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is an article about a living person who is heavily represented in the current news cycle. There are no scholarly books on the specific subject of how Wikipedia should refer to the race/ethnicity of Kamala Harris in her BLP. O3000, Ret. (talk) 13:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Scholarly books will not tell Wikipedia to express itself in a certain way, @Objective3000: but to the extent that WP considers scholarship to constitute the most reliable sources (see, WP:SOURCETYPES): Many Wikipedia articles rely on scholarly material. When available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources., those 16 sources published after 2021 by the best academic publisher are certainly more reliable than the cascade of reporters trying to beat yesterday's deadline.
    @Raladic:Please note that MOS:IDENTITY states, "When there is a discrepancy between the term most commonly used by reliable sources for a person or group and the term that person or group uses for themselves, use the term that is most commonly used by recent[j] reliable sources. If it is unclear which is most used, use the term that the person or group uses. But footnote [j] says, "In MoS's own wording, "recent", "current", "modern", and "contemporary" in reference to sources and usage should usually be interpreted as referring to reliable material published within the last forty years or so. In the consideration of name changes of persons and organizations, focus on sources from the last few years. For broader English-language usage matters, about forty years is typical"
    40 years means from 1985 onward. Thus not only scholarly sources listed above but Kamala Harris's own self-identification of African-American from 2003 (when she became SF DA), to CA AG, to US Senator) until end of 2020 (when she became VP) was "African American." This is solid reliability that the newfound overabundance of "Black" among reporting frenzy of this past week does little to dent. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:49, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The most important part you've missed here from MOS:IDENTITY is the word wikt:en:recent - use the term that is most commonly used by recent reliable sources - in the literal English language sense and the follow up, that if there's disagreement - to bias it an use what the person themself use - If it is unclear which is most used, use the term that the person or group uses.
    The historic sources may be one thing, but for identity, we rely on most recent identification, including if in doubt - primary reliable sources - as I already linked above from WP:ABOUTSELF.
    She did not just last week change her identification as Black American as shown on her primary sources such as the white house, that has been for a long while. It may be that other secondary sources have only more recently caught up to support it, which is fine and supports our MOS guidelines to use exactly that - the most recent reliable sources, not historic ones.
    Misinterpreting it to mean we can't use more recent sources if they deviate from older ("recent") sources is getting into WP:WIKILAWYERING territority, it would mean for example that we would not report on the current President right now, since on average over the last 40 years there have been many Presidents, so which one is the most recent President based on the RS as you're interpreting the guideline. Raladic (talk) 18:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Raladic: "recent" in MOS is specific, if there is descrepency betwen the "most commonly used by reliable sources for a person or group and the term that person or group uses for themselves, use the term that is most commonly used by recent[j] reliable sources." They don't mean for an abstract term such as "president." They mean in this instance, her, or KH. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it is unclear which is most used, use the term that the person or group uses. Sounds pretty obvious, doesn't it. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:27, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But it is not clear what she has recently used, for in the definition of MOS:IDENTITY footnote [j], MOS has laid out a very clear meaning of the terms "recent," "current," etc.: for a name change, it is a few years; for everything else, 40 years is typical.
    Kamala Harris has self-identified as as "African American" from well-before 2003 until 2020. That is more than 17 years. She has increasingly self-identified as Black during the last four. The scholarly sources, which carry Wikipedia's imprimatur of reliability, moreover, even among those published after 2021 refer to her as "African American" more often than they do "Black American" or "Black." So, it is not clear there is any need to even invoke MOS:IDENTITY; clearly the US Senate, whose President she is doesn't, as she is called African American on the Senate's websites in more places than one.
    This is encyclopedia. It uses the formal linguistic register, i.e. "African-American," for all Black American U.S. political office holders from before emancipation until now, when describing them as the "first, or second, or third, etc., ..." All are "African Americans" in their first mention in the lead. You can see that impressive list in my statement. Why should we make an exception for her alone now, after four years? They've all said they were Black too at various times in their lives. If you want to describe her as the first person of Jamaican or Indian ancestry (as this article once did), fine make a case for it. But if you want to describe her as the first Black American, it goes against a well-established precedent on WP, of describing them as African American, not least of which is that the page Black American redirects to African Americans. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not "name change" (last few years) vs. "everything else" (40 years), it is "persons and organizations" (last few years) vs. "broader English-language usage matters" (40 years). --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE
    )
    13:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Yopienso, Objective3000, Raladic, and EvergreenFir:
    There is another issue with writing, "She is the first Black ...." What will you link "Black" to? The page Black says, "This article is about the color. For the race, see black people," a page which begins with, "Black is a racialized classification of people, usually a political and skin color-based category for specific populations with a mid- to dark brown complexion." If you are going to link it to Black Americans, the link will take you straight to African Americans, which is an ethnic category.
    So why engage in eastereggery i.e. violate the principle of least astonishment in an encyclopedia catering to a worldwide readership? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:16, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't think readers don't know what Black means in this context? O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:27, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you leave Black unlinked, many readers will not be aware that it is not a racial category we imply. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What else could readers of this article possibly think Black means? Eye color? WP:BLUDGEON O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:33, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In context, "Harris self-identifies as a Black woman of Afro-Jamaican and Indian (Tamil) ancestry", the source appears to be saying that Harris uses 'Black' to refer to both her African and Asian roots. This is in line with a common UK use, where the word refers to all 'non-European' ancestries, similar to the US term person of color I believe. Pincrete (talk) 07:26, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No its not that at all. No one in the US calls South Asians Black and neither does she. As I've said here before and will repeat until blue in the face, "Her ancestry is Jamaican and Indian, but her identity is Black or African-American. This is because it that was the Universe whose oxygen she breathed during a critical period of her childhood (when her parents' marriage had broken and her working mother had returned to the Bay area). It is the culture and ethnicity she is imprinted on. In other words, if she had not told us about a Jamaican father and Indian mother, there is no way we would know that from her language, manner, or behavior (and I don't mean looks). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Very simple, it links to Black Americans, which as you pointed out is a redirect to African Americans, which points out in the first sentence of the lead that the two terms are used synonymously - African Americans, also known as Black Americans or Afro-Americans, so no one will be astonished or confused. Raladic (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I obviously saw the first line, but you will still leave the reader wondering why you did not link it to African Americans in the first place, if your encyclopedia redirects it? Or, what is the difference between Black Americans and African Americans? You will create layers of complication. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:33, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The won't even notice the redirect. This is going beyond WP:WIKILAWYERING. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Summarizing, that you are saying the Wiki text [[Black American|Black]] which will be redirected to [[African Americans]], springs no surprises to an average reader. Thank you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think both Raladic and I are saying that. The reason we have piping in wikilinks is it is very common to have the text in the link different from the name of the linked article. And why would they even see the name of the redirect unless they hovered over it; in which case they would see both Black American and African-American? There is no problem here. O3000, Ret. (talk) 11:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Having been on Wikipedia for nearly 18 years, I do know about piping. But when the reader sees Black, they don't if the racial category Black peoples is meant, or the ethnic category African American. If they print the article, they could come away with interpreting it to be racial. And when they hover the cursor over it, it says, "Black Americans redirects to African Americans." Seems needlessly confusing. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think Asian Americans could be included. I agree with user: Alaska4Me2's suggestion. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Kamala Harris's self-identification and ethnicity

    [edit]

    I would like to suggest adding Kamala Harris’s self-identification and ethnicity to the main text so voters can know the truth. For examples, 1) Asian American 2) African-American 3) Afro-Jamaican and Indian (Tamil) heritage. 4) Black Goodtiming8871 (talk) 12:29, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Of all of the reasons to add that is the weakest, why should it matter to voters what her ethnicity is?, and we should not pander to such attitudes. Slatersteven (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think Kamala Harris's identity is just what it is, and it should not be judged as weak or strong. Instead, shouldn't the citizens of the United States fulfill their basic right to know the identity of the candidates who will represent the greatest power in the world, the United States? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See wp:soap and wp:not. Slatersteven (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Given the related wp:soap and wp:not, I think that part could have been included. I'll hold off on that for now. I'll try to find other content that would be helpful to voters in the US presidential election. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 12:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Like polices? Slatersteven (talk) 12:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I think the US president leads the direction of the US and determines the future of the US and, by extension, the future of the world. For this reason, I'd like to judge whether Kamala Harris's previous language direction on government policies will be helpful to the US and the world. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Off-topic post

    India is a country full of different ethnicities, languages and cultures. Kamala Harris's mother comes from Tamil Nadu in the south of India. Kamala Harris herself has already spoken about the south. It's important to make this clear, and it's not enough just to say that her mother is Indian. Her ethnicity was mentioned, but someone with little knowledge of the subject had to remove it. So it would be good to put it back in.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/my-chitthis-significance-sen-kamala-harris-speaking-tamil-national-stage-n1237562

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9037j47pyzo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E0A:211:5C70:ED5C:B11C:93EF:7BC9 (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @2A01:E0A:211:5C70:ED5C:B11C:93EF:7BC9: Sorry, but you should open a new section/thread, as your comment does not belong to the topic of this RfC which is about ethnicity in the lead of the article, in particular the African-American or Black American, or Black, aspect of her ethnicity. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposal to slighly alter the education-part of the Infobox

    [edit]

    Change from

    to

    or perhaps an abbreviated version thereof.

    The name of the college has changed and this should be reflected in the infobox. Felixsj (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    There has already been significant edit-warring on this issue. My personal preference is for the name in effect at the time she graduated. Affixing a name that did not yet exist is an anachronism which professional historians are carefully trained to avoid.
    And to be clear, as an undergraduate, I majored in history in one of the highest-ranked departments in the world. One of my recommenders for law school is the current department chair and is famous enough to be the subject of a WP article, on which I am silently recused. --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There shouldn't be edit warring at all when the current consensus is to use University of California College of the Law, San Francisco.
    Anyways, it seems like the name change is retroactive under Californian law. While we are not bound to follow it, it seems like the Hastings version is considered to have never existed at all. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:10, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    What’s the relevance of your second paragraph other than to name drop? 2A02:C7E:2EC1:8D00:4B7:38B1:4018:EB1A (talk) 19:52, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Is there a policy on this, because it happens frequently today. Often, people's names are removed because of their involvement in slavery, genocide or politically incorrect views. TFD (talk) 21:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To respond to User:Super Goku V's statement above about a "retroactive" name change: In that linked discussion, User:Spotty's Friend cited no source for the claim about "the clear and explicit intent of the California Legislature". The actual bill as enacted merely says Hastings's name "must be removed" but says nothing about retroactive effect.
    Under California law, the general rule is that "unless there is an 'express retroactivity provision, a statute will not be applied retroactively unless it is very clear from extrinsic sources that the Legislature ... must have intended a retroactive application.'" (Myers v. Philip Morris (2002) 28 Cal.4th 828, 841.) Any ambiguity is construed in favor of prospective application. (Ibid.)
    In other words, one needs to be able to point to very clear extrinsic evidence. However, if you look at the notice and agenda for the relevant vote on November 2, 2021, and the resulting press release, nothing in those materials mentions that the college was seeking a bill with immediate retroactive effect.
    Also, I strongly doubt that a discussion which was on this talk page for only about a week before it was archived could be fairly said to represent a stable consensus. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Stable consensus, not anymore. But with that discussion, there should not have been edit warring. At least a new discussion was finally started.
    As for the rest, I thank you for the clarity that it was not retroactive. That disputes the major claim in the prior discussion. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, one more point: At the time of that earlier archived discussion linked above, the State Bar of California had voluntarily chosen to retroactively display "UC College of the Law" on the official records of all Hastings alumni. But if you look at the current record for Harris, it again displays her law school as "UC Hastings COL." It looks like this is because the State Bar adopted a policy at its May 16, 2024 meeting (search the linked agenda for item 704, "Adoption of State Bar Policy on Law School Name Changes on the Attorney Profile") in which law school name changes would be applied only prospectively to new members of the State Bar. --Coolcaesar (talk) 17:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I wonder if that was the cause of the earlier confusion. In any case, given the current record, it seems to make more sense to stay with what we have rather than change the infobox. --Super Goku V (talk) 19:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Word Salads

    [edit]

    Similar to the way the article on Donald Trump mentions his frequent lying, even in the lede, prominent mention of Kamala Harris' frequent, rambling, well-publicized incoherent word salads should be made in this article. TopShelf99 (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    sources? Slatersteven (talk) 16:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are hundreds of examples, with well-regarded sources. They are not hard to find. TopShelf99 (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    THen provide them. Slatersteven (talk) 14:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ohh and read wp:or and wp:rs. Slatersteven (talk) 14:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello TopShelf99, I agree that this article also mentions Kamala Harris's frequent, rambling, and widely known incoherent arguments, so that people who participate in the election can fairly learn about people's tendencies, and that this is what makes a fair Wikipedia.
    If you could give me even one example of a Source, it would be helpful for me to find more. I think it would be a great contribution to the general public, and not an option, to allow people who create Wikipedia to fairly see the true tendencies of the people who are running for president to represent the people. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please also read wp:not and WP:FALSEBALANCE before posting any suggested text. Slatersteven (talk) 11:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the suggestions: both wp:not and WP:FALSEBALANCE . I've seen the mainstream media support one party in the US, so it can be hard to find reliable sources on issues of this party. Hi, TopShelf99, if you have a source, but it's not a mainstream media source, we can check the references on the talk page here. For example, if it's a Youtube video with Kamala Harris's voice, we can listen to it. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 06:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And read wp:v please. No a youtube video that requires us to engage in OR can't be used as a source. Slatersteven (talk) 12:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate where you are coming from. My frustration is that the only so-called reliable sources that Wikipedia administrators accept are those that lean left, and that are strongly supportive of Harris, similar to how they supported Biden and Obama and have not masked their discontent with Trump. For example, even extreme left wing MSNBC is considered reliable, while right wing Fox News is generally not. Similarly, most Wikipedia editors tend to lean left, as is evident by the tenor of articles about conservative vs. liberal politicians and comments on talk pages. So to try to get an unbiased article about any politician is nearly impossible, but we need to keep trying. TopShelf99 (talk) 00:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps you need to read our very well-sourced article on Fox News and see why it's not considered an objective, reliable source. For example, "Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch testified that Fox anchors endorsed conservative conspiracy theories about the election." HiLo48 (talk) 04:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We allow a number of conservative news outlets, Fox is not the only conservative news outlet. And read wp:soap. Slatersteven (talk) 11:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It was TopShelf99 who brought Fox News into the conversation. HiLo48 (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your response and opinion. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 09:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is why my comment was indented as a reply to them. Slatersteven (talk) 11:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    pronunciation of Kamala

    [edit]

    The pronunciation given on the page is incorrect and it is not how Kamala refers to herself. The correct pronunciation is KəH-mə-lah. That is Kuh muh lah. Kuh muh luh is also ok. The stress is on the first syllable.

    Source: Sanskrit english dictionary entry for Lotus. Also type in kamala in google translate for Tamil (kamala’s mother tongue) or Sanskrit to get the right pronunciation.Hariraumurthy (talk) 19:11, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    We need a source of her saying it. Slatersteven (talk) 19:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's pronounced - Calm-ma-la. GoodDay (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Really? That second syllable would appear to rhyme with "car", or "la" in the musical sense. I don't think most people say the second syllable that way. HiLo48 (talk) 00:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Rhymes with her nickname by her step-children. Mom-ma-la. GoodDay (talk) 00:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    [[5]] it seems its "comma-lah". Slatersteven (talk) 09:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The sound of the "o" there would vary a lot depending which accent it's said with. HiLo48 (talk) 23:53, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe, but its at least a source and not wp:or. Slatersteven (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry if this is obvious to everyone, but the article used to include Kamala Harris saying her name: File:Kamala-Devi-Harris-pronunciation.oga. The quality is not great, but it's hard to argue with the authenticity. Two edits changed it: 21:04, 16 August 2024 and 00:53, 17 August 2024. Johnuniq (talk) 10:17, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 August 2024

    [edit]

    She failed her California bar exam on her first attempt, subsequently passing. 208.81.192.53 (talk) 18:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Citation: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/magazine/kamala-harris-a-top-cop-in-the-era-of-black-lives-matter.html?_r=0

     Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 August 2024 (3)

    [edit]

    A punctuation correction - Location of change: Section: Vice Presidency; subsection: Immigration; 2nd paragraph; last sentence. Change "...human trafficking; a woman's..." to "...trafficking, a woman's..." by changing the semicolon after "trafficking" to a colon mark. Goman1 (talk) 23:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Good eye. Changed to comma, not a colon. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Chinese Name

    [edit]

    Please add her historically used Chinese name to her page:

    Kamala Harris
    Traditional Chinese賀錦麗
    Simplified Chinese贺锦丽
    Transcriptions
    Yue: Cantonese
    Jyutping3 1 1

    Lusanders (talk) 08:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done ;I think it's unfair for voters to have the misconception that she might be Chinese, because she clearly confirmed by reference [1]that she is not Chinese. If she is going to use a Chinese name just to get Chinese votes, she should at least have Chinese heritage. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We have already rejected this idea. Slatersteven (talk) 12:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your kind update. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 09:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Its not an update, its informing them we have already discussed this. Slatersteven (talk) 11:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    To increase the accuracy of this article: Please add important historical fact that Kamala Harris lived in Berkeley California when she was born.

    [edit]

    Kamala Harris was born in a hospital in Oakland California, but her physical address where she & her family was living was in Berkeley, California.

    By omitting this fact, the article for many people possibly alludes that Kamala lived in Oakland, California when she was born, yet this is not accurate.

    My suggestion on how to honor this important historical fact:

    Change: Kamala Devi Harris was born in Oakland, California, on October 20, 1964.

    To: Kamala Devi Harris was born in Oakland, California, on October 20, 1964, while she and her family were living at 2531 Regent Street, in Berkeley California. Greenmcguire (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Please provide a citation for this claim. 331dot (talk) 18:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Took a quick search and apparently there has been some recent news coverage about it: Seattle Times: "The word almost never spoken was the name of Harris’ actual hometown: Berkeley, California. (...) She was indeed born in an Oakland hospital in 1964, but she did not settle in the city until she was in her 20s and working as a prosecutor in the county district attorney’s office." USA Today has a timeline.
    As for the change suggestion, if it does happen then I think we can omit the actual address and just say that 'she and her family were living in Berkeley, California' or similar.--Super Goku V (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you --Super Goku V, I agree with you. - lets make omit Kamala's two actual Berkeley home addresses for now based on your reason for not wanting to bother the current residents living in the Berkeley apartments where Kamala lived during her formative childhood years - and we can just make sure to include the fact that she lived in Berkeley during most of her childhood 'early' years. Wikipedia has an 'Early Years' for a reason I'm sure. Let's honor it & not hide the city where Kamala spent most of her 'Early Years'. I think just making sure we say that she lived in Berkeley is quite important - as the current language could be misleading. When we read it, it seems to us all that she could have lived in Oakland during her childhood, or perhaps that she 'lived' in the hospital where she was born - and we all agree that this could not be further from the truth.
    At some point, We all know that it is inevitable that very soon, the two addresses where Kamala grew up & spent most of her formative childhood years (both of these addresses are in the city of Berkeley California) will be all over the internet and here on Wikipedia. I hope Wikipedia is not last to the table on this.
    As history evolves, the two Berkeley addresses where she spent her childhood (never in Oakland) will be part of US History - no matter whether she wins or loses the presidencial election.
    I have no idea if news articles can be relied upon for evidence, though we have found hundreds of them showing where she lived during her childhood in Berkeley similar to this one:
    https://www.berkeleyside.org/2024/08/19/kamala-harris-berkeley-homes

    The article shares photos from the Book Kamala Harris wrote herself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truths_We_Hold

    In this particular article, two family photos (all shared frequently online by Kamala herself and also in her own book: Kamala Harris’ 2019 memoir, The Truths We Hold) shows her family in front of Harris’ first residence in Berkeley at 2531 Regent St. This Berkeley residence is where Kamala, her sister and her family states that her family lived in when Kamala Harris was born.
    Shared more prevalently all over the internet by Kamala herself are photos of Kamala, her sister, mother and grandparents standing on the property, next to their second Berkeley home at 1227 Bancroft Way, Berkeley California, where Kamala and her family lived for a more extended period of time, and is the one residence where Kamala spent most of her childhood upbringing, attending elementary school in Berkeley as well.
    _____________
    As to O3000,'s comment about Berkeley being merely the 'Northern' part of an Oakland township - we are no longer in the mid-1800's which is when Europeans were still newly arriving to the area because of the Gold Rush. Long gone are the Gold Rush days. The language you mentioned referred to the mid-1800's. In fact, Berkeley was incorporated as a City in 1876 and Oakland is a different city altogether. Today we are in 2024 - not the 1850's. I think we should not refer to how things were in California during the 1800's when referring to a person who was born in the 1960's.
    Berkeley is not the 'Northern' part of an Oakland township and hasn't been for more than 200 years. Berkeley is a world-renowned city in the United States of America, situated in the County of Alamedia, and a short drive from San Francisco. Most parents in the world's greatest wish is for their kids to get accepted to the University of California at Berkeley, California. And, some of these kids grow up to be parents of Kamala, like Kamala's own mother and father - who both attended UC Berkeley as graduate students in the 1960's. The Lawrence Berkeley Lab (where Kamala's mother worked) is not in Oakland. Many people in the world learned this when watching the Oppenheimer movie. Growing up in Berkeley had an immense positive impact on Kamala Harris' life. Kamala Harris shared a photo of her Berkeley 2nd grade elementary teacher with Kamala and her mother when Kamala received her law degree 21 years later.
    In fact, the city of Berkeley is one of the oldest and most prominent cities in California. For many years in our nation, Berkeley had the largest college population in the Western United States. According to the reputable US News and Reports, UC Berkeley is one of the top 5 universities in the world. Oakland is quite unknown in comparison. Also, a majority of American Nobel Prize winners are from Berkeley California, which is quite notable. Is it because of something in the water? Is it because of the abundance of trees or organic produce at Berkeley Bowl? I don't know, but it's definitely something someone ought to look into at some point. I'll be heading over to Berkeley Bowl as soon as I finish writing this.
    Wikipedia asks that we focus on facts - not bias.


    Let us put down the facts, without bias, and without omitting Berkeley as her home when she was born. We don't want to 'influence' our readers into beleiving that Kamala Harris 'maybe' or 'potentially' lived in Oakland during her formative years - which is quite misleading and absolutely not true. Oakland is a very different city than Berkeley. As soon as Kamala was born, her parents drove from the hospital in Oakland to their home where they lived in Berkeley California. Kamala and her family were not 'living in the hospital'. We owe it to the world to let them know the truth.
    Thank you to all the editors here who believe in sharing the facts, not hiding the facts.
    and...Go Bears!
    (a famous Berkeley Saying :) Greenmcguire (talk) 04:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't provide a reason for omitting the address, but if you want one, it is too much detailed info that few readers would care about from my perspective.
    I hope Wikipedia is not last to the table on this. That kinda is what Wikipedia is intended to be. We wait for what RSs say.
    I don't believe I have much to say for the rest of your reply. --Super Goku V (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems hardly an important historical anything. As for the history, Berkeley is an area that was the northern part of Oakland Township and the College of California was a private college founded in Oakland that became Berkeley. In any case, she was born in Oakland. If someone is living at 2531 Regent Street, let’s leave them alone. O3000, Ret. (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, leave the precise address out of the article. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Objective3000 Berkeley has not been part of Oakland for almost 150 years. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE
    )
    12:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am unsure this is all that significant. Slatersteven (talk) 19:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are folks trying to tie her to UC Berkeley which is nicknamed The People's Republic of Berkeley. She did not go to Berkeley. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What has this to do with where she lived? Slatersteven (talk) 19:25, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It should have nothing to do with it. But what is and what should be are often different. [6] O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:48, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Based on the reply to my comment, apparently it is a big deal to some to connect the two. --Super Goku V (talk) 05:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Do RS connect the two? Slatersteven (talk) 10:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    None that I see. Of emphasis, I would note O3000, Ret.'s reply to me about the situation. --Super Goku V (talk) 00:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Apparently it is a "big deal" to those attempting to push the narrative that she is "Comrade Kamala" from the liberal bastion, the University of California Berkeley, an odd type of guilt by association. In fact, while still a toddler the family moved to the Midwest. At 5 the family returned to Berkeley in then a working-class part of the city with a large population of Black families. Then Montreal, then Washington D.C., then Alameda, eventually settling in Oakland. O3000, Ret. (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Objective3000 I say this as someone who is planning to vote for Kamala, but it seems odd that the article currently goes out of its way to avoid mentioning what city she lived in California. It has no problem specifying "Urbana, Illinois", and Illinois is a lot smaller than California, and I'm not buying the "guilt by association" part because the article has no problem mentioning that both her parents attended UC Berkeley. If you look at other articles, Joe Biden specifies "Claymont" and "Mayfield" Delaware, Donald Trump mentions the "Jamaica Estates" neighborhood he grew up in, Tim Walz mentions "Valentine, Nebraska" (despite the hospital being in "West Point, Nebraska"), and JD Vance mentions "Middletown, Ohio", but this one just says "California"?
    I would propose the following:

    The Harris family moved from Berkeley, California in the fall of 1966, around Kamala's second birthday, and lived for a few years in college towns in the Midwest where her parents held teaching or research positions:[1] Urbana, Illinois (where her sister Maya was born in 1966), Evanston, Illinois, and Madison, Wisconsin.[a][2][1][3] By 1970, their marriage had faltered, and Shyamala moved back to California with her two daughters;[4][5][1] the couple divorced when Kamala was seven.[6] In 1972, Donald Harris accepted a position at Stanford University; Kamala and Maya would spend weekends at their father's house in Palo Alto and live at their mother's house in Berkeley during the week.[7] Friends of Shyamala, among them African-American intellectuals and rights activists in Oakland and Berkeley, served as mentors for the Harris girls.[3] Five years later, in 1976, Shyamala accepted a research position at the McGill University School of Medicine, and moved with her daughters to Montreal, Quebec.[8][9] Harris graduated from Westmount High School[b] in 1981.[11]

    --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE
    )
    12:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, this isn't Mount Vernon or Monticello. She lived in that house for two years before moving to the Midwest. Unlikely she has any memory of living there.[7] I have no problem with your proposal, just where she was born -- the subject of this section. O3000, Ret. (talk) 13:15, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems fine enough and doesn't overemphasis her connection to Berkeley. --Super Goku V (talk) 00:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ a b c Dinkelspiel, Frances (March 8, 2021). "Update: Change in Berkeley law not needed to landmark the childhood home of Kamala Harris". Berkeleyside. Archived from the original on August 19, 2022. Retrieved August 19, 2022.
    2. ^ Kacich, Tom (August 2, 2019). "Tom's #Mailbag, Aug. 2, 2019". The News-Gazette. Archived from the original on August 25, 2022. Retrieved August 19, 2022.
    3. ^ a b Goodyear, Dana (July 15, 2019). "Kamala Harris Makes Her Case". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on November 18, 2021. Retrieved August 19, 2022. Growing up, Harris was surrounded by African-American intellectuals and activists. One of her mother's closest friends was Mary Lewis, who helped found the field of black studies, at San Francisco State.
    4. ^ Horwitz, Sari (February 27, 2012). "Justice Dept. lawyer Tony West to take over as acting associate attorney general". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on July 8, 2019. Retrieved August 23, 2020.
    5. ^ Martinez, Michael (October 23, 2010). "A 'Female Obama' seeks California attorney general post". CNN. Archived from the original on November 16, 2016. Retrieved January 22, 2014.
    6. ^ Barry, Ellen (13 September 2020). "How Kamala Harris's Immigrant Parents Found a Home, and Each Other, in a Black Study Group". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 27 August 2024. Retrieved 27 August 2024.
    7. ^ Russell, George Fabe. "Where did Kamala Harris grow up? A timeline". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-08-27.
    8. ^ Whiting, Sam (May 14, 2009). "Kamala Harris grew up idolizing lawyers". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on March 1, 2020. Retrieved January 11, 2014.
    9. ^ "When your best friend from high school winds up in the White House". JGH News. November 2020. Archived from the original on April 28, 2024. Retrieved April 28, 2024.
    10. ^ Black, Peter (August 20, 2020). "Kamala Harris's Montreal experience". Press-Republican. Archived from the original on November 21, 2020. Retrieved November 9, 2020.
    11. ^ Dale, Daniel (December 29, 2018). "U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris's classmates from her Canadian high school cheer her potential run for president". Toronto Star. Archived from the original on September 14, 2019. Retrieved July 1, 2019.

    Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 August 2024

    [edit]

    Reword the last sentence of the first paragraph, which is "Harris is the Democratic Party's presidential nominee in the 2024 U.S. presidential election." I am requesting that it be reworded to "Harris is the presidential nominee for the Democratic Party in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 17:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see any particular reason that wording is better than the original - could you elaborate? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. Jamedeus (talk) 19:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Kamala Harris’s Track Record

    [edit]
    Thread retitled from "Kamala Harris’s Track Record: Big Spending, Wokeness, Equity and Flip Flops". WP:TALKHEADPOV O3000, Ret. (talk) 11:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    "There are various sources, including CNN, that support the fact that Kamala Harris actually changed what she said. What do you think about adding an item to the main text about this? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 09:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Well you can always actualy produce such a source. Slatersteven (talk) 09:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For example, Kamala said that the government should require American citizens to sell their guns to the government. And the government should require citizens to buy guns with cash. In quite a few cases, Kamala has changed her tune. Source: You can search for the above title on YouTube as an external link. - This was produced by John Stossel's channel with 975K subscribers, with various reliable News, Interview sources attached. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 09:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    THis is not an RS. We need an RS saying she has changed her tune on issues such as Big Spending, Wokeness, and Equity, not YouTube videos or editors wp:or. Slatersteven (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    YouTube links are the actual recorded speeches of Kamala Harris and the recorded testimony of someone she works with. I will summarize them by topic. The actual sources of the content are CNN, GovTrack Fox News, etc., which are Wikipedia's accepted sources. First, I will summarize them by topic. If I summarize them, other people will be able to find the actual sources based on the summarized contents and the video. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Read wp:primary and wp:or we do not evaluate or extrapolate. If RS does not explicitly say it we cannot. We need RS drawing conclusions, we cannot (and per wp:v it has to be stated, in black and white, what those conclusions are). Slatersteven (talk) 11:31, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's first summarize what Kamala Harris actually said on the recording, by topic. Then, other users can find the credible evidence that was actually used. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    We do not do fishing, we need RS saying this (as I have said more than once) and I oppose adding this until I say otherwise. This is my last word on this, until my word changes. And this is a wp:blp We can't make accusations (even on the talk page) unless RS make them. Slatersteven (talk) 11:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I understand that RS should have at least one clear reason for each. It seems that it should be summarized as a separate topic.Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Are YouTube channels like CNN, GovTrack Fox News, etc. included in Wikipedia:Reliable sources that can be used on Wikipedia? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 12:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    In general, videos should be used with great care. If they are of the article subject, especially a politician, saying things about proposed policy, they are primary sources, subject to the interpretation of the viewer/editor, and should only be used to substantiate something significant that they said that has been covered and given context in secondary sources, or should be used for simple factual statements like "I was born on XX." It is too easy to quote out of context, or to place a personal interpretation on the clip - much like the original section heading at the top of this thread. A noted historian giving a lecture or being interviewed on their topic of study would be a different situation and would have greater scope. Acroterion (talk) 12:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    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).