View text source at Wikipedia

Talk:Fred Trump

RfC

[edit]
Closed as no possibility of this being endorsed. Non-admin close Pincrete (talk) 09:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should this article have a section about Fred Trump's physical apperance? FMSky (talk) 17:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is premature. A RfC usually results from a discussion that has an unclear outcome. The arguments as to allegedly objectionable content haven't been explained. UpdateNerd (talk) 23:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No per UNDUE. Especially the first paragraph in that section; I don't think I've ever seen such a crudely written paragraph like that in a biography. The way it is cobbled together is wildly UNDUE. And the refs for that first paragraph only have very brief passing mentions on his physical appearance, such as: ...blond parted hair...receding dark hair...sported a comb-over...his eyes were blue...standing six feet one.... That is not significant coverage about his physical appearance to make it relevant or notable. The remaining paragraphs can be incorporated into his personal life section. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:55, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No: Physical descriptions are generally irrelevant unless he's a boxer or somesuch. ―Howard • 🌽33 23:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No (invited by the bot) Not enclyclopedic/useful. And I don't see how it even would be covered.....get an expert's analysis of his face? North8000 (talk) 13:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No (Summoned by bot) - Huh? Weird. No. Might be due weight to include a bit of it throughout, but a dedicated section? No. This doesn't require an RfC, though. It looks like just one person edit warring their preferred version. Get rid of it and take that person to ANI if they restore it. Now that I look at this article, there's all sorts of weird puffery in here. "he was photographed with celebrities" under a section called "prestige"?? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True, and the weird notes section should probably also be looked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump#Notes
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024

[edit]

Please Change:

Meanwhile, his mother continued the real-estate business Frederick had begun.

To:

Meanwhile, his mother continued the real-estate business Friedrich had begun.

Note: This article refers to Fred Trump's father as "Friedrich Trump". While Friedrich Trump did apparently change his name to Frederick at some point during his life, it would be best for this article to be consistent in naming him, preferably using his birth name, which differs from Fred Trump's birth name, which is, in fact, Frederick. Jusskippy (talk) 16:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 03:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2024

[edit]

I AM NOT POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. NOT AMERICAN. opening paragraph suffers from vague grammar and conflates fred trump with his son, donald. i propose the following rephrase.

CURRENT PHRASING: He was the father of Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States and current president-elect. PROPOSED PHRASING: He was father of US president Donald Trump.

since the name donald trump remains hyperlinked, the reader may hover/click for further details. it's a clean solution. Boondogglebob (talk) 13:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Reads a lot better that way too in my opinion. -OXYLYPSE (talk) 15:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Trump

[edit]

Fred Trump was not arrested in 1927 at a klan rally, he was detained for a short period of time and released. He was never charged or even taken into the precinct. this should be corrected. Do some research the records are available, I found them I’m sure you can too 2603:7000:C700:19E:EDB7:5F69:B7B8:8978 (talk) 13:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded comma

[edit]

@UpdateNerd I'm not saying that the comma in the beginning doesn't work, but I think the sentence flows better without it. Wikieditor662 (talk) 07:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Correct grammer tramps aesthetic prefs, UpdateNerd (talk) 09:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Both options have correct grammar. Wikieditor662 (talk) 16:37, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The burden of proof is on you. This is known as a parenthetical comma. The lack of a comma would erroneously mean that there is another 45th & 47th POTUS. UpdateNerd (talk) 03:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How could it imply two people if Trump is the only person listed? Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It implies that there is another person not being mentioned. It doesn't make sense and is precisely why the grammar rule exists. UpdateNerd (talk) 04:07, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm okay, if you insist. Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]