Talk:Jenna Bush Hager/Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment Drive

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- 98.6.77.134 05:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Alcohol related publicity

Given the prominence of the reports at the time, and her fathers long history of substance abuse, shouldn't there be a section on Jenna's hard partying days when she was engaged in underage drinking? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.221.152 (talk) 23:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

      someone should dig something up on that!! you never know know what happens at boozed up orgies?-MLX

Main Picture

Why is Elmo there? This article is on the daughter of the President, not Sesame street! :s I know it doesn't have to be flattering but isn't there some sort of picture with her muppetless?

Inconsistency

This article and its sister article on Barbara claim that one was born in Midland and the other in Dallas? True? Any sources for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.162.0.45 (talk • contribs)

Actually, it is true that each of the Bush twins was born in a different city.

Then how exactly are they fraternal twins? The article certainly is in error somewhere. - 24.10.95.220 21:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

nope,no error, twins can be born days, even few months, apart

/s/ willy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.195.77.150 (talk) 20:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Third opinion

See Talk:Barbara Pierce Bush -Amatulic 18:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

No. It is very simple. If Al Gore III's article is going to devoid of any and all references to his driving record, alcohol and drug abuse problems, and his inability to drive the speed limit without, and his inability to drive a car without alcohol in his system then the Bush twins will not be subject to biased treatment. It will be equal or not at all. As far as I can tell including those items, but not including the long, long, long record of Al Gore III--at least five, may be six, incidents, starting when he was 13 until just recently--is unequal and POV treatment. Wikipedia is supposed to be nonparisan and maintain a Neutral Point of View. Referring to their two SMALL run ins and not referring to his HUGE lengthy and detailed brushes with the law is clearly a POV pushing, Bio of Living person violation. I will revert the information until there is a concensus at Al Gore III. Also, this is a Bio of a Living Person and we are NOT going to defame anyone. Have a good day.--Getaway 22:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Please note that you do not own this article and must respect consensus and WP:POINT. Including this information is within the policy set in WP:BLP - these individuals are public figures whereas that is much more questionable in regard to Al Gore III, but that is not in discussion here. If you have an edit dispute regarding the Al Gore III article then discuss it there. Not here. You are interrupting Wikipedia to make a point in regard to your edit dispute in that article. Children of a president are far more notable than those of a vice president, this incident received quite a bit of media/press attention and was a notable event both in the media and for her public persona. --Strothra 17:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

In hindsight, the Al Gore III article stayed, as it should have. Also, the application of the rules consistently throughout Wikipedia ruled the day and the Al Gore III article and the Bush twins articles received the same treatment, in direct contradiction to the pleas of Strothra.--Getaway 04:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Bush twins

Please note that threats of revert warring (and then partaking in it) violate various policies on Wikipedia. Notably, WP:3RR and WP:POINT. Please also note that you would be violating WP:CONSENSUS. Removal of well sourced information, which is not contrary to WP:BLP will be considered as vandalism and as such, all of these are likely to get you blocked.-Localzuk^(talk) 23:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Clearly I have never talked to you. Therefore, you need to assume "good faith." Based upon the above comments. I do not believe that you are. You never responded to the underlining issue involved. In the Al Gore III article, there are editors who have decided to keep out all references to Al Gore III's legal problems. Now, in the Bush twins articles there are editors that have decided to put this information in. It is blantantly POV. You never responded to that issue. You are only focusing on blocking me. That is NOT good faith. I would encourage you to follow the Wikipedia rules and discuss the underlining rule.--Getaway 16:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The emerging consensus on the Gore III article is that the information should be merged with either Al Gore or some new article about the Gore family, since Al Gore III is not himself notable enough to support a standalone article. As such, the relevant determination here is Jenna Bush's notability, and if she is determined to not be notable, the information in this article should be merged to George W. Bush and Laura Bush. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 21:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

She may be not the fist First Twin to marry as implied, see this: If the Bush twins follow the lead of President Woodrow Wilson's daughters, Barbara will tie the knot quickly. In 1913, Jessie Wilson was married on Nov. 25 - the twins' birthday. Her sister, Eleanor Wilson, got hitched a few months later on May 7, 1914. [1] --Vladko (talk) 06:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Pix

Can anyone find a better image of Jenna Bush? The one included here is blurred and pixelized. Its also not very flattering. kathzzzz® 04:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Images do not have to be "flattering," however, this image is of poor quality. There are other on wikimedia, you may wish to replace it with one of those. --Strothra 14:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Misdemeanor

The Bush Twins committed a misdemeanor. It is not a felony and it is not the end of the world and it should not define who they are. Now, I have been attempting to trim down the reference to the incident(s) which were almost six years ago. However, the incident keeps being moved to the top of the and given great emphasis. I can only believe that the reason for this is POV. It should not be the first thing mentioned about the twins. It should be a basically a footnote to the article. I have not attempted to remove the information entirely--as was the case in the Al Gore III article. I now agree that it should be in the article, but let's be real it has to be the first thing in the private life section?? No. That is pushing an agenda.--Getaway 17:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, the edit that Strotha is attempting to make is factually wrong. Jenna Bush was charged with two incidents. One was in April and the second was May. Strotha keeps changing the wording to read that they both ocurred in May, which they did not.--Getaway 18:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I put this up above, but given the fact that a) these incidents received a lot of media attention at the time and b) That Jenna and Barbara are the children of a well know alcoholic, I think it's relevant to include references to their drinking past. On the one hand this isn't much different from countless other teenagers, but given their fathers long history of substance abuse it says something that the daughters were caught involved in heavy drinking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.221.152 (talk) 23:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Tonight on 20/20 ABC News show's interview conducted by Diane Sawyer (28 September 2007) at one point Jenna Bush defended herself and Barbara saying, "We never did binge drinking unnecessarily" I guess she is rationalizing how she never felt her parents disapproved of the underage drinking episodes as long as law enforcement remained out of the picture. TimothyJShaw Timothyjshaw 03:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

• Yuh

"She attended the University of Texas at Austin where she was a legacy member of Kappa Alpha Theta sorority (her mother, First Lady Laura Bush, is also a Theta). On April 29, 2001 Jenna was charged with a Class C misdemeanor of being a minor in possession of alcohol in Austin, Texas. [...] On May 29, 2001 Jenna was charged with another misdemeanor—attempting to use a fake ID (with the name Barbara Pierce, her paternal grandmother's maiden name) to purchase alcohol. She pleaded no contest to both misdemeanors.[5] Jenna graduated from UT with a degree in English."

This doesn't flow at all. It goes "She attended University of Texas at Austin -> She drinks [...]-> She drinks -> She graduated with a degree in English!" Maybe some more on her education is needed and the misdemeanors can be moved somewhere else in the article? 71.68.15.63 15:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Edited above comment, per discussion. Ariadne55 (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The Blotter as source

The Blotter is not really a blog, its an award-winning ABC News Investigative Unit created by Brian Ross, ABC News' Chief Investigative Correspondent.[2] The Blotter article re Argentina is a good solid news article. And even more neutral than the Boston Herald article, which is not even completely available anymore. The Blotter even points out that hotel staff says the naked twins incident did not happen. Also, the paragraph, as I had edited it, was completely neutral and uncontroversial.[3] I think it should replaced. --Evb-wiki 01:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I have seen discussion of The Blotter on talk pages of other articles and there seems to be a consensus that it acceptable because it a effort of professionals at ABC News. However, I would point out that the particular blog article that is cited needs to be read completely through because there is up-dated contradictory information at the end of the blog entry. At the end, Ross points out that the U.S. Embassy flatly denies the claims of the blog and it points out that the twins did not exit Argentina early--blowing a huge hole in the claims (and wishfull thinking) that they were "kicked out" of Argentina.--Getaway 02:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Of course, asking someone to leave (esp. someone with a high profile) and kicking someone out are two very different things. The article never suggested they were kicked out, and it was clear that the twins did not leave early. Significantly, the Blotter did not over-emphasize the tabloid claims that they were running around naked, as did almost every other "source" that mentioned it, including the Boston Herald. --Evb-wiki 02:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

someone should put the information of alcohol arrests back in

i dont see why the bushes would get different treatment than paris hilton or mel gibson or any other public figure involved in scandal

to remove it because getaway clearly has some kind of problem with al gore is biased

let him put al gore's driving record back in.. but to ignore the bush kids substansial substance abuse problems is biased.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.55.20.70 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 30 July 2007

The alcohol information is still in the article. It has not been removed. The above comment is simply flat out wrong.--Getaway 13:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Henry Hager

I started a discussion regarding the notability of her fiance Henry Hager. Does he meet the criteria to have his own article? Please add your opinions here. BlueAg09 (Talk) 21:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, there is a AfD discussion now. Access it here. BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

When is a writer an author?

Are you an author before your book hits the bookstores? This article states that Jenna is an author and schoolteacher. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johno95 (talk • contribs) 01:25, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

Oh, I get it. You write a book, but you can't say you are an author. No, I don't get it. She wrote a book that makes her an author. Simple as that.--Getaway 01:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

How about book writer? BlueAg09 (Talk) 01:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Webster's Dictionary: "author" is (1) The writer of a book, article, or other text or (2) One who practices writing as a profession. She falls right into both of these separate independent definitions. I say we follow Webster's and call what she is an author.--Getaway 01:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I say call her a writer. Good compromise. --johno95 02:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

She is an author according to every definition of the word I can see.-Localzuk^(talk) 07:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

does that mean every student is automatically an author? I mean we all have written some texts and articles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.0.15.56 (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

If a person writes a book, they can be called a writer. I think a more pertinent question is whether she is a published author. Although in today world of self-publishing, being published does not really mean all that much.

Have any of her books been published by a reputable third-party publisher? Throckmorton Guildersleeve (talk) 16:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you read the article? It clearly states that she was published by HarperCollins, one the leading publishers in the world--over $1 billion USD in gross revenue. You can learn more about HarperCollins in Wikipedia. Of course, she is a "writer" that's just a silly question.--InaMaka (talk) 17:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Misdemeanor

Where has the information regarding the misdemeanor gone?-Localzuk^(talk) 13:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It's in the article, under college years.--Getaway 13:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I found it. Dunno how I missed that...-Localzuk^(talk) 14:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it has been erased again. Apparently when the Dutch royalty edit have their page edited and cleaned it makes international news, but the Bush twins and the Republican party can clean and edit their own pages as much as they like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.106.180.43 (talk) 06:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Country of her UNICEF Internship is Jamaica / / not Panama (as in WIKI article)

Lots of in-country footage [ABC 20/20 date 28 Sept. 2007 episode] showing her counseling and dancing with local kids - - Kingston, Jamaica.

timothyjshaw Timothyjshaw 03:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Photo

This isn't a big deal, but does anyone else think it might be more useful in an encyclopedia to have the photo of the subject be one in which she is the prime actor, rather than a shot with three people plus a muppet? Epthorn 12:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Yup. However, (and I haven't looked) there are constraints on what compatibly-licensed images are available. --Kbh3^rdtalk 22:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

'Other name'

I removed the listing of her 'other name' as "twinkle". If you look at all the other pages- Bush, etc, you will see that their USSS codenames are not considered other names. I understand the article is lacking in detailed content, but that factoid was unnecessary and not particularly notable. Epthorn 12:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Place for humorous mentions?

Before looking up the Bush family today, the only place I'd ever heard of the subject of this article was in one of The Onion's best headlines, "Jenna Bush's Federally Protected Wetlands Now Open For Public Drilling". Since my edit mentioning this was reverted within five minutes, I thought I should ask if Wikipedia offers a place for this sort of humorous fame. 70.15.116.59 00:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)