Talk:Ivanka Trump/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

The Apprentice World-wide WikiProject

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

Substance

This article is in need of substance. What of her business career and her ventures? Who cares about Paris Hilton comparisons. Wiki is not a tabloid and that is tangential to the pertinent matter of this person; she is a business woman, first and foremost and we should really cover some items showing that she either is or is not one. I would like to see information from start to finish about how she earned her merits, career info, and successes, as reported by media. I think that would provide a substantive and well rounded biography. The way it stands now, it appears to me someone has gotten the basic facts right, but we need more meat on this article. If there is a claim here that this person has earned their success, lets show it, or expose it, in all the glory of Wiki neutrality. I think this person deserves, as any biography does, a rounded exposition on what is what. This just seems like a vanity page to me and this person clearly is not in need of that--has a lot more to offer from an achievement perspective, than that. --98.208.209.78 (talk) 00:16, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I am 98.208.209.78, there is a comment on my page in regards to this. Future edits will be all under my name for clarification.--☯Lightbound☯ talk 01:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Spelling

Why is "principle" (box on the right side) misspelled? It even links to a page that has nothing to do with the article. The correct spelling here is "principal."

Mimhoff1 (talk) 13:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)mimhoff1

I have moved your comment on this talk page into this area here so that it increases the readability of the talk page.--☯Lightbound☯ talk 02:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Picture

What happened to the picture that matches the caption? TonyTheTiger 19:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Why no picture?

As of this date, there are now two pictures. FYI, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 19:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

which 'cum laude'?

on the official site of the apprentice, it states that ivanka graduated 'magna cum laude' (http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/06/theshow/ivanka_bio.html). unfortunately, on this website: http://www.golfdigest.com/gfw/gfwcover/index.ssf?/gfw/gfwcover/gfw200611trump.html , she states she graduated 'summa cum laude'.

i've changed it from summa to magna, sry if i got it wrong. i hv no means of vandalism; but this is very confusing!--Sli723 00:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Quick Facts ??

shouldn't this be named trivia ? Quick Facts sounds like the paragraph title these trivias were ripper from

socialite and heiress arnt occupations

both socialite and heiress are listed as her occupation, how can someone work as a heiress? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.72.203.242 (talk) 06:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Controversies

This entire section violates at least two Wikipedia principles as currently written. Each of the listed controveries needs a citation to support its claim as per Wikipedia:Verifiability, and the weasel words should be removed as per Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View. Mobilegamer 19:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I pulled it/deleted it just now, and if whomever put it up puts it back in that same form I'd advise next time having a moderator/editor notified of their actions. Wikipedia does try and clamp down on baseless accusations since I can't think of a worse, more PoV way to ruin an encyclopedias credability (even one that often lacks as much credability as any celebrity article here does). While I may not be a fan of her capabilities, that doesn't mean I think it's okay to slander someone just because they happen to be lucky in who they were birthed to. For the record it also violated at least three policies, it also violated the 'no original research' clause as well as the two you mentioned. If the poster can back that stuff up from an outside source, more power to them and it belongs. Otherwise don't insinuate something negative about the lady just because you don't like her. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.132.156.26 (talk) 10:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

Sean Oeding?

I deleted the "trivia" piece about her dating some guy named Sean Oeding. The link was to Topher Grace's biography on Yahoo!, and a quick survey of the web does not pull many hits on him. As if to verify this was not true, the quote also said he was dating Scarlett Johannsen, but her Wiki page and Yahoo! mention nothing about this guy.

So, whomever you are Mr. Oeding, nice try at some PR, but it did not work! Scryer_360 19:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Ivanka Trump herself edited this page!

Not kidding, at least the part it says that it is rumoured she had a breast implant operation.[1]Kessingler 07:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ivanka

For the time being I only want to make my presence known on this page of yours.

Mergatroidal 23:00, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

School mates

When did Ivanka attend Choate Rosemary Hall? If she graduated from high school in 2000, did she ever know Angela Ruggiero, who graduated from Choate in 1998. If they did go to school together, why wasn't that a subplot of the show? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeefJerkey (talk • contribs) 04:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they went to Choate for a few overlapping years. If they knew each other, it needn't be part of the subplot of a TV show, of course. Frankg (talk) 23:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Comparisons to Paris Hilton

I think these are ridiculous. See my recent addition to the article. Unlike the Hilton family, Ivanka's dad has nothing but pride over his daughter. The media seem too stupid to comprehend that wealth, beauty and blondness do not a valid comparison make. Give Trump a break! SimonATL (talk) 00:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This should really not even belong here. This is riding on the razors edge of neutrality and the gossiping of tabloids. This is an image issue and not really clean under the biography standards. I suggest we remove it entirely. Any to support this? --☯Lightbound☯ talk 02:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I did not even see the date of this original poster. This was three years between. I am going to go ahead and cut it. It does not match with the Wiki standards for biographies. Here is why: WP:BOLP under the section regarding that Wikipedia is not a tabloid and that the issues should represent a substantive view of the subject and not opinions and personal views. A biography is a lasting impression that should show substantial subject matter. In this case, a single set of comments regarding tabloid comparisons between two people is subjective, regardless of verifiable sources. Therefor, I am deleting that section. --☯Lightbound☯ talk 02:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Natural hair colour picture?

Can we get a picture where she is blonde? Perhaps one of the following? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Ivanka_Trump_2009.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/Ivanka_Trump_cropped.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Ivankatrump.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenstein_/3503248186/ https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IvankaTrumpJun09.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenstein_/3502438617/ https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ivanka_Trump_at_the_2009_Tribeca_Film_Festival.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenstein_/3503248666/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/mil8/771741927/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenstein_/3503249810/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/mil8/770769485/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/seedsofpeaceofficialsite/3342276876/

Many of these are already on WikiMedia and those which aren't have been verified as been labelled for fair use via https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ivanka+trump&client=opera&hs=qZ8&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAWoVChMIrIH8947ZxgIVwq7bCh2UpgGZ&biw=1536&bih=758#q=ivanka+trump&tbm=isch&tbs=sur:fc&imgrc=eghBcXCkDBFGzM%3A --88.104.136.214 (talk) 22:11, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done -- Nicely done; blonde picture herein look great. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 13:11, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Introduced her father to run for president

This should be noted in the article here: 

Headline-1: WATCH: IVANKA INTROS FATHER DONALD TRUMP PRESIDENTIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

Anyone editing this article should watch this six-minute video clip for insights to Ivanka Trump. The video is great! -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 13:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.

Campaigning for Donald Trump

Here is the radio campaign ad audio-clip just out.[2] -- She praises her dad. A link to the audio was on the Drudge Report, (viewed by 20million). -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Net worth gender gap

Working on Trump family articles for the Esperanto Wikipedia, I noticed that Ivanka's brothers' articles both have their net worth showing in the Infobox, but hers doesn't. Is this gender bias or what? --Haruo (talk) 14:54, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Change that photo!

Could you change Ivanka's photo at the top of the entry? She's horrible, on Commons there are better photos of her, like this: File:Ivanka Trump at the 2009 Tribeca Film Festival.jpg!--Mauro Tozzi (talk) 16:41, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The top picture looks good now. Do you agree? -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 19:09, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 Done -- Yes, agree; great pictures; thanks, AstroU (talk) 13:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2016

3 children 132.239.90.54 (talk) 02:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Arabella, Joseph, and now Theodore James Trump. -- AstroU (talk) 03:19, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

 Done by another - Arjayay (talk) 16:27, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

New NEWS today, for future editing

This (and other) articles have great pictures and text. 

Headline-1: It's a boy! Ivanka Trump gives birth to third child

QUOTE: "Ivanka Trump, daughter of the Republican front-runner Donald Trump, has given birth to a baby boy, she announced via Twitter Sunday.

Theodore James is her third child with her husband Jared Kushner.

"Jared and I feel incredibly blessed to announce the arrival of Theodore James Kushner," Ivanka Trump tweeted." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 02:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.

"The proud grandfather has yet to make any public announcement." -- AstroU (talk) 02:13, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Headline-2: Ivanka Trump is the picture of happiness as she leaves hospital and returns home with newborn son Theodore, less than 48 hours after giving birth to her third child

QUOTE: "The 34-year-old, who gave birth at 5.43pm on Sunday, beamed with joy as she was pictured heading into her Park Avenue apartment with her husband Jared Kushner as he carried their precious baby in a car seat. ... holding baby Theodore in his arms, while Arabella perches behind him, clinging on to his neck in an embrace. Both father and daughter Arabelle are showing off wide smiles to the camera, while Theodore rests peacefully in Jared's arms. ... Ivana Trump was pictured holding her newborn baby grandson Theodore for the first time in a heartwarming image taken inside her daughter Ivanka's hospital room and shared on Monday night ..." [pictures and video include grandfather Donald Trump at Easter, Melania too.] -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 00:14, 30 March 2016 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing.

Should 'Religion: Judaism' be qualified by (convert)?

I see a little recent back-and-forth over the question of whether to add a parenthetical (convert) to the identification of Trump's religion as 'Judaism' in the infobox. My personal opinion is that I don't see why adding (convert) is necessary in the infobox. It appears to me, not to add important information, but to express some editors' point of view related to Judaism. People are not born with a religion, in the way that they are born with a gender or a race, and for any adult, 'religion' identifies a matter of personal choice. We don't make a habit of parenthetically identifying most people's way of acquiring certain characteristics in infoboxes. I've never seen, for example, 'Christian (inherited)' or 'Nobel Prize winner (undeserved)' in a biographical infobox. I'd prefer to see the religion as simply the one word, and then, if it is possible to discuss using reliable sources, some information about Trump's conversion to Judaism could be added to the body of the article. Does anyone else have an idea about the best wording for the infobox? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

It should be mentioned due to the meaning of who is a Jew.--88.104.136.214 (talk) 22:03, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
It shows that, even after centuries of discussion, there's still two classes of Jew, and that they never merge. It might be OK to add "convert" if there was also the discussion of why Jews maintain that there's a difference.Santamoly (talk) 04:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Chelsea Clinton?

"She is a close friend of Chelsea Clinton ... " With the ad hominems that Ivanka's father has applied to Hillary Rodham Clinton, is this still true? I won't assume that the relationship is terminated, but it must at least be strained. Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 00:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunate coverage of convention appearance

The coverage here about Ivanka's convention speech is pretty bad. It completely ignores the rave reviews that she got - see https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/23/ivanka-trump-continues-to-impress-the-media-her-father-feuds-with/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_mhp-card-politics%3Ahomepage%2Fcard to get a summary of all the positive remarks. I'd add it myself but the article is locked. 2600:1001:B12D:4697:6175:88AC:53FD:451F (talk) 10:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

 Done Let me know if I captured the important points--Nowa (talk) 00:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 July 2016

Change this line:

Early life

. . . Ivanka's parents divorced in 1991, when she was 10 years old.

TO

Ivanka's parents divorced in 1991, when she was nine years old.


Reason: Ivanka Trump was born on October 30, 1981 Divorce was made official Thursday, May 23, 1991

May 23, 1991 - October 30, 1981 = 9 years 6 months 23 days.

Sources below:

At last, Donald and Ivana Trump officially settle their divorce deal The Baltimore Sun [1] March 25, 1991|By Newsday NEW YORK -- The couple of the '80s who split in the '90s, Donald and Ivana Trump officially brought down the curtain Saturday when they settled on the divorce deal of the decade.


Now divorced, Trumps bicker over gag order United Press International, Inc. [2] May 23, 1991 State Supreme Court Judge Phyllis Gangel-Jacob confirmed that she signed a decree of divorce for the Trumps Wednesday at a closed courtroom session, with the decree becoming official Thursday.

Date calculation: http://www.calculator.net/date-calculator.html?today=10%2F30%2F1981&ageat=05%2F23%2F1991&calctype=diff&x=61&y=10

BobSD99 (talk) 12:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


BobSD99 (talk) 12:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Done MediaKill13 (talk) 07:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-03-25/features/1991084035_1_ivana-trump-donald-and-ivana-divorce-settlement
  2. ^ http://www.upi.com/Archives/1991/05/23/Now-divorced-Trumps-bicker-over-gag-order/9463674971200/

Update relatives

Donald Trump Jr. (brother) Eric Trump (brother) Tiffany Trump (half-sister)

Should be edited to include: Barron Trump (half-brother)[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jd505 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Done 🔯 Sir Joseph 🍸(talk) 19:03, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20175764,00.html

Czech nationality should be added

The law effective at the time of birth Trump's children by Ivana Trump (http://www.zakonyprolidi.cz/cs/1969-39/zneni-0) declares in Paragraph 8 "Acquisition of citizenship by birth" under point 4 the following: "(4) Dítě, jehož jeden z rodičů je cizincem, nabývá narozením státního občanství republiky, jestliže druhý z rodičů je státním občanem republiky." A child, whose one parent is a foreigner, acquires the citizenship by birth, if the other parent is a citizen of the republic. Hence, all Trump children by Ivana Trump are dual US - Czech (and thus, EU) citizens, unless they actively renounced their citizenship (which I think is improbable). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.214.215 (talk) 17:10, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Ivanka Marie Yael Trump Kushner

The full name after her marriage to Jared Kushner should be at the headline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.90.5.213 (talk) 08:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2016

change the image to File:Ivanka Trump at Aston, PA September 13th 12a (cropped).jpg. Image uses now is not good as there is shadow on the bottom-left corner. 219.79.97.97 (talk) 02:07, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. -- Dane2007 talk 05:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-Protected edit request

Please add the word "an" before the quote about Ivanka Trump's feelings toward her conversion. Basic grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.179.99 (talk) 22:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Ivanka is an independent

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelm (talk • contribs) 06:05, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Jewish Telegraph "mainstream as it comes"  ??? Really ???

I reverted an undue bit about Ms. Trump's visit to a cemetery during the campaign. I feel this is undue and that it would require coverage in RS mainstream venues that treat it as a noteworthy or significant event. This was promptly reverted with an edit comment "JTA is as mainstream as it gets". Regardless of its following within the Jewish or Brooklyn communities, that source does not qualify as mainstream media coverage, and certainly does not establish this event as encyclopedically significant. Other opinions please? SPECIFICO talk 17:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to remove it. Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information, it's an encyclopedia. The goal of an article is not to collect every piece of information about a topic, it's to provide an overview. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:53, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
I agree with User:Avaya1 on this. It is true that Jewish Telegraphic Agency is as mainstream as it gets. You can go to any large library and ask the librarian for directories that list Jewish periodicals, and you'll find it there. They do fact-checking and meet every other criteria of WP:RS.
The fact that she went to the Lubavitcher Rabbi's grave is noteworthy. A Google search for "Ivanka Trump visits the Lubavitcher rebbe’s grave" shows that the JTA story was covered in the Jewish Post, Jewish Press, The Forward, Haaretz, and other major Jewish publications across the spectrum of Jewish viewpoints. The multiple coverage alone is enough to establish WP:WEIGHT. (There are many varieties of orthodox Judaism, and this suggests that she was affiliated with the Lubavitcher sect, as opposed to for example modern orthodox, which is probably why the Jewish press gave it so much coverage. But I'm just saying that for your understanding, and all that's necessary to include it in Wikipedia is to have multiple WP:RS reporting it.) I think it should go back in, but I'll wait for someone else to second that.--Nbauman (talk) 06:30, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Ivanka and her husband are attending a Lubavitcher synagogue. http://forward.com/news/358968/ivanka-trump-and-jared-kushner-pick-55m-home-and-chabad-synagogue-in-washin/ I think that should go into the article. The difference between attending a modern orthodox synagogue and a Lubavitcher synagogue is like the difference between being an Episcopalian and an Evangelical. --Nbauman (talk) 06:45, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
It definitely merits inclusion. It was even covered by non-Jewish press. Why would mentioning this give it undue weight?Bangabandhu (talk) 07:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2017

Add |years_active=1997-present in the infobox. She begins her modelling career in 1997. 219.79.226.138 (talk) 13:09, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 13:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2017

Add |caption=Ivanka Trump in January 2017 in the infobox. 219.79.97.174 (talk) 05:06, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Done Gulumeemee (talk) 06:09, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette

Why are people saying that Ivanka Trump is like Marie Antoinette? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.32.138 (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2017

Add caption: Ivanka Trump unveiling her child-care policy in her father's 2016 presidential campaign 219.78.191.75 (talk) 11:24, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

What evidence is there that's a correct caption? Bangabandhu (talk) 16:30, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
@Bangabandhu: see the discription of the image. --219.78.191.75 (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. The requested edit is inconsistent with the description of the image. It is not clear that the policy is hers, but rather "crafted in part" by her. Also, MOS:CAPTION indicates a caption is not necessary for a biography article and no rationale has been provided for why the requested edit is needed or desirable.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  23:32, 31 January 2017 (UTC)  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  23:32, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2017

154.122.139.214 (talk) 08:59, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 11:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2017

Remove the duplicate <!-- Do not change without discussing on the talkpage --> message in the infobox, either at the front or at the back. 219.79.181.87 (talk) 06:24, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. I think it was just done for extra-emphasis. But it has no impact on the article in anyway as those are entirely hidden from view. El_C 06:29, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
It was done for extra emphasis, due to edit warring. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:32, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2017

Section Early life: Trump's parents divorced in 1992, when she was ten years old. 223.197.138.98 (talk) 08:39, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Done Cannolis (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Problems with lede

Off the bat, this sentence is incorrect and unsubstantiated:

She spent a decade as an Executive Vice President of her father's company – the Trump Organization – as well as serving as a boardroom judge on her father's TV show The Apprentice.[1]

References

  1. ^ "Ivanka M. Trump". Trump.com. 2016. Retrieved September 29, 2016.

The citation is blank, and even the archived version does not say either of those things: [3]. -- Softlavender (talk) 07:26, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

That is a problem. I will tag it as a dead link for now, and hopefully get time to look into later. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:51, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I edited it somewhat to avoid misstating facts. Softlavender (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 March 2017

Change the pp-blp template to pp-30-500. 219.79.180.106 (talk) 03:06, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

This is already done. The current lock top icon is the 30/500 lock template. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Monarchy

Can someone add in a section on family members working at the White House, and if this conflicts with the constitution?

I had mentioned in previous post about wives being involved, Rosalyn Carter sat in on cabinet meetings for President Carter, and Hillary Clinton was involved in healthcare.

But what about daughters- what are the historical comparisons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.32.138 (talk) 15:58, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

What is the official title of her position?

"Special----"?

  1. USNews&WorldReport
  2. TheHill
  • etc

However, per the [Hope Hicks, a White House spokeswoman, referred to Ms. Trump as “first daughter” NYT], "Hope Hicks, a White House spokeswoman, referred to Ms. Trump as “first daughter” ...". The piece also references 1st child Anna Roosevelt Halsted, etc.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Personal Life Update

The third paragraph states "Her other friends include Georgina Bloomberg, whose father Michael Bloomberg has also considered entering the presidential race." It should be changed to "had also considered" since Michael Bloomberg announced some time ago that he wouldn't run as a third-party candidate and endorsed Hillary Clinton, which has been sourced on his page. Cheers! 174.112.138.129 (talk) 15:02, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, Gap9551 (talk) 15:48, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


The line regarding their home is misleading. The cited article mentions it is not known if they own or rent. Other sources (not cited) state they rent. The Wiki article states that they own the house. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szabaka (talk • contribs) 17:18, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ivanka Trump. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks, bot. Rebbing 17:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Photo

  • 2017
    2017
  • 2016
    2016

The image in the infobox keeps getting changed with neither an edit summary nor consensus here, I have reverted 3 times now to the original, long-established image, yet it keeps getting reverted. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:08, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I have changed it to the 2017 image. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Pinging @Davidmejoradas: who keeps changing the image without an edit summary. We've had the 2016 one for the most of the time and it appears to me a change was never discussed. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
  • The 2017 image is very clearly superior, the 2016 image is the very definition of over-exposure. Stop being difficult for no reason. Calibrador (talk) 12:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Agree, the 2017 image is way superior and has a better resolution. STOP CHANGING IT FOR NO REASON. Davidmejoradas
  • The longstanding image is more professional and with a resting face. At any rate, I see no consensus here yet for changing it.(Avaya1 (talk) 02:51, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I personally think the 2016 is far more representative. I've never seen her look like 2017 (and would not even have guessed it was her). Perhaps when her father is no longer in office we can use a photo without the flag (but hopefully not the 2017 one here). Are there no other fair-use photos available? Softlavender (talk) 11:03, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
There is a somewhat large selection of photos available at Commons:Category:Ivanka Trump, but not have been put forward by an editor. Feel free to browse and suggest a superior image if you find one. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:10, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Other things being equal, which I think they are here, a BLP should surely choose a more flattering over a less flattering photo. That would mean using the 2016, IMO. Bishonen | talk 11:19, 14 March 2017 (UTC).
  • I support using the 2017 image.Classafelonymonkey (talk) 13:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • 2016 photo seems a lot more representative to me. Anyway, there is definitely no consensus here to change it yet. Avaya1 (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Mistake in article

She graduated summa cum laude with a bachelor's degree, - not cum laude - see all cited sources! --1rhb (talk) 19:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Done — IVORK Discuss 08:57, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
The original version (cum laude) was correct, according to the source I added (Huffington Post, Sep 7, 2016). Their info checks out - see archived version of last year's Trump Org website: https://web.archive.org/web/20160227035659/http://www.trump.com:80/the-next-generation/ivanka-trump/. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 14:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Semiprotection from extended confirmed

Please let me know on my talk page if the downgraded protection becomes an issue and I will up it to again to ec. El_C 05:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

"one of the world's most affluent families" ?

I doubt the following sentence in the article :

In 2003, she was featured in Born Rich, a documentary about the experience of growing up as a child in one of the world's most affluent families.

Ivanka was born in 1981, her phase of "growing up as a child" may be considered as the 1990ies. Was - then - the Trump family "one of the world's most affluent families" ?

I don't find a reliable source for that and propose to change the quoted sentence. --Neun-x (talk) 03:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

This is hardly a controversial statement. Classafelonymonkey (talk) 20:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Add "controversies" section?

Can we add an edit to list the various controversies surrounding Ivanka and the Trump administration, such as her father's sexual remarks, nepotism, and etc.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livingfractal (talk • contribs) 17:40, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

WP:STRUCTURE discourages writing "controversy" sections. Also, I'm not sure the controversies you mention have enough coverage to be appropriate to Ms. Trump's biography. Rebbing 18:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I agree. "Controversy" sections inevitably result in coat racking. Classafelonymonkey (talk) 20:08, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Identifying the subject's children

Per WP:MINORS, someone who is incidental to an article, but significant enough to mention even without identifying them, should not be identified "even if good sources do publish the name, when a more general description will suffice." So let's remove the kids' identifying info. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:32, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

The reference that is used to the cite the information is named with the child's name, as well as containing it in the headline.Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Disagree. The children play a significant, public role. They are frequently, prominently featured on her social media. Removing them from here is akin to excluding the names of Sasha and Malia from Obama's entry. Bangabandhu (talk) 13:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm not objecting to the existence of this BLP about a president's' daughter who has chosen to be very notable and influential. But the grandchildren are not, despite one of them singing for the Chinese president (which is in this BLP using only her first name without birth date, and I have not removed it). WP:MINORS says (emphasis added):Do not name or otherwise identify the person, even if good sources do publish the name, when a more general description will suffice." Even if we ignore WP:MINORS, we still find similar advice elsewhere, for example at Template:Infobox_person#Parameters which says, "For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of children of living persons, unless notable." Suppose it were perfectly fine to give the names of these children; it would still be bad writing to give such detail including the full and exact birth dates. Birth dates are often used to confirm identity in our society, and anyway why would the year alone be insufficient? Surely we do not really want readers to feel it necessary to pay attention not just to the birth year but to the birth month and birth day. Same goes for the full middle names. It's just overkill. Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
I agree that birthday is unnecessary. Their names, however, are not. They are widely mentioned and reported, not just in the article I cited, but in plenty of other sources too. They are the first grandchildren and their parents have not objection to them taking a public role. Are you suggesting we should delete the name Barron Trump, too? Bangabandhu (talk) 03:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
No, Barron Trump is stuck with fame whether he wants it or not. The grandchildrens' middle names are clearly unnecessary in this BLP. I agree with you that it's a closer question regarding their first names. Of course, just because a parent has not objected doesn't mean that the child has no privacy interests distinct from the parents. I have not removed the first name of the child who sang for the Chinese leader. Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Per MOS, an infobox "summarizes key features" of the article subject. "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose. Exclude any unnecessary content." Accordingly, ten of the twelve exemplary officeholders' infoboxes don't mention their children at all. --Dervorguilla (talk) 05:59, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Note A related discussion is taking place at Talk:Jared Kushner/Archive 1#Identifying the subject's children. Unless some exceptional reason is giving both articles should follow the same conclusion, as they are about the same information. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

WP: Minors is very much in play here. I VERY STRONGLY OPPOSE adding the names of the kids.Classafelonymonkey (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2017

Change cum laude --> summa cum laude on page 2 Jeffcoleman844 (talk) 04:50, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Done Cannolis (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

@Cannolis: Doesn’t anyone ever check the history of the article or the Talk before making changes based on requests by new accounts without any editing history before or since? The Sep 7, 2016, HuffPo reference reports (and presents evidence!) that the claim of her having graduated summa cum laude was false. I therefore added the reference and corrected the article on May 18, 2016, and added an explanation to this Talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ivanka_Trump#Mistake_in_article. I’ve now removed the three older fluff pieces on "Ivanka’s drop-dead gorgeous eyes" etc. which were from a women’s fashion magazine, a men’s fashion magazine, and the NY Times fashion & lifestyle section. The backflap of Trump’s first book also touts the summa cum laude claim; her new book doesn’t and neither did the Trump Organization’s bio which is still available on the web archive - third paragraph from the bottom: Ms. Trump graduated Cum Laude from the Wharton School of Finance at the University of Pennsylvania and received a bachelors degree in science in economics. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 06:22, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Cum laude, not summa cum laude

Continuing the previous section with a title that hopefully the next editor who is considering "correcting" the latin honors type from the current correct "cum laude" to the incorrect "summa cum laude" will see and refrain from doing so. There are quite a few of old and newer articles out there that have it wrong because nobody checks on something "everybody knows" and, apparently, nobody every asks to see any proof. The "summa cum laude" claim was on the back flap (hardcover)/back page (paperback) of I. Trumps's first book; there was only one edition, as far as I can tell, and the mistake was never corrected. It was also in the bio the Trump Organization used on its website in "The Next Generation" section until late 2014 (and the title of that section is a sacrilege!) when they removed "summa" along with replacing the photo with the not-appropriate-for-business attire. If anyone wants to look it up, here’s the link to the 2011 version of her Trump Org bio, claiming summa cum laude honors: web archive capture June 6, 2011. I could add a short sentence to the article to prevent readers and other editors from thinking it's a mistake, unless there are objections; for the link to the last (2015-2016) version, see previous section.
Quoting from her new book: "Perception is more important than reality. If someone perceives something to be true, it is more important than if it is in fact true. This doesn't mean you should be duplicitous or deceitful, but don't go out of your way to correct a false assumption if it plays to your advantage." Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 15:06, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Modelling

There are numerous cross-references to other Wikipedia pages, none of which mention Trump, but only two actual citations for that whole body of alleged modelling work. What are the sources? Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 07:04, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Clothing factory. Addition reverted without justification.

The article is currently under heavy protection, with the requirement that "You must not ... reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article..."

Today, I made a sourced addition to the article, about a factory that makes clothes for the Ivanka Trump fashion label. Soon after, User:SlackerDelphi reverted it, giving a reason that does not withstand scrutiny: "The article does not say that Trump's clothes are made there--tenious tie to Trump. Guardian hit piece. Needs to have stronger tie to Trump."

The article does say that the factory makes clothes for the Ivanka Trump fashion label. Normally, I would:

  • WP:AGF that SlackerDelphi had accidentally skipped the relevant part of the article,
  • revert SlackerDelphi's reversion, and
  • simply add the relevant quote from the article as evidence.

However, the protection measures above forbid this.

Therefore I request consensus to re-add the following paragraph to the article:

In June 2017, a factory in Subang, Indonesia, where clothes for the Ivanka Trump brand are made via an arrangement with G-III Apparel Group, was revealed to pay poverty wages, to routinely require unpaid overtime, to frequently verbally abuse its workers, and to flout holiday laws.[1]

References

  1. ^ Varagur, Krithika. "Revealed: reality of life working in an Ivanka Trump clothing factory". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2017-06-13. Retrieved 2017-06-13. Alia [makes] clothes for brands including Ivanka Trump at the PT Buma Apparel Industry factory in Subang, West Java. ... Many Buma workers know who Ivanka Trump is. Alia noticed her labels popping up on the clothes about a year ago. ... Alia makes the legal minimum wage for her job in her province: 2.3 million rupiah, or about $173 a month – but that legal minimum is among the lowest in Indonesia as a whole, and as much as 40% lower than in Chinese factories, another labour source for the Ivanka Trump brand. ... "You have to assess minimum wages in the context of the country itself and, in that context, it's not a living wage," said David Welsh, Indonesia and Malaysia director at the Solidarity Center. ... Jim Keady, an American labor rights activist who has worked extensively in Indonesia [said,] "But with these poverty wages — and I would call it that — just because something is legal, doesn't mean it is moral." ... Seven workers also said they were subject to verbal abuse. ... Buma also has a pattern of firing workers right before Ramadan [because] Indonesian law dictates all workers are owed a holiday bonus according to their religion... "The buck stops with her," said Keady, of Ivanka. "It's her name that's on the dress. Without her there is no brand."

Please WP:PING me if you reply. Thanks! zazpot (talk) 17:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Zazpot: You do not have any consensus to re-add the sentence below because there is a sentence in the Guardian article that completely undermines your claim that the Trump's garments are made in the factory pointed out in the article. The article, and I quote directly, says, "PT Buma, a Korean-owned garment company started in Indonesia in 1999, is one of the suppliers of G-III Apparel Group, the wholesale manufacturer for prominent fashion brands including Trump’s clothing." This sentence makes is clear that the factory in the article is owned by PT Buma which supplies to G-III Apparel Group. The sentence also makes clear that G-III makes clothes for many "prominent fashion brands", way more than just Trump. This sentence contradicts other parts of the article. In the article cited there is zero definitive evidence that this particular factory is making Trump clothing. There is no tie to Trump, other than an attempt to make a link by guilt by association. You do not have consensus to re-insert the questionable material.--SlackerDelphi (talk) 17:31, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
@SlackerDelphi:, I think you are attacking a straw man. No-one here is claiming that the factory only makes clothing for the Ivanka Trump brand. The article does claim, though, that the factory makes some clothing for that brand: "Alia [makes] clothes for brands including Ivanka Trump at the PT Buma Apparel Industry factory in Subang, West Java." zazpot (talk) 01:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@Zazpot: You have thought wrong. I am not attacking a straw man. Your argument is a red herring. My comment is quite straight-forward and you have not replied to it. The article points out that there is a contractual relationship between PT Buma and G-III and it points out that there is a contractual relationship between G-III and Trump. But the article does not point out a contractual relationship between PT Buma and Trump. The factory belongs to PT Buma, but the article does not provide any contractual privy between PT Buma and Trump. Maybe PT Buma makes clothes for G-III that eventually get to Trump but maybe not. There is no proof of that in the article. It is a merely an attempt to place guilt by association. Also, even if you can get consensus to make the claim that the article definitively provides a contractual relationship between PT Buma and Trump (to which I will not agree) then you have another problem, which is your heavy-handed wording which is not presented in a neutral manner. SlackerDelphi (talk) 02:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@SlackerDelphi: another straw man from you! No-one here is claiming "contractual privy [sic]" between PT Buma and Ivanka Trump. As for your "maybe not", this is contradicted by the article. Please see my previous comment, above. zazpot (talk) 02:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@Zazpot: You seem to only understand one concept and that is straw man. But that does not get you over the problem you have. You have an article that does not show a definitive connection between PT Buma and Trump. I have reviewed your comment above over and over again and you haven't provided any response to the fact that the article has a sentence that implies there might be some connection between PT Buma and Trump through G-III but there is no definitive connection. And your sentence is violates NPOV. And you did not respond to that blatant violation of Wikipedia rules. SlackerDelphi (talk) 02:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@SlackerDelphi: your primary argument against inclusion is a straw man argument, which is why I have been making that point. As for my proposed addition being non-NPOV or a "blatant violation of Wikipedia rules", that is as imaginary as your straw man. My proposed addition summarises the WP:RS's key assertions; nothing more. zazpot (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@Zazpot: This discussion is going nowhere. I am not going to agree to add your sentence which violates NPOV and it ignores contradictory statements in the article. Also, you just keep repeating the word "straw man" and that does not help your case. Since you have repeated three times now, without providing any other new information then it is clear you don't have any other valid rationales to support your sentence.--SlackerDelphi (talk) 15:15, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@SlackerDelphi: we clearly differ about:
  • the meaning of the cited source, and
  • the validity of your objections to my proposed edit.
We differ about these things sufficiently that neither of us has been able, despite some effort, to convince the other that our viewpoint is correct. I propose we disengage from discussing the matter with each other for the time being. Sound good? zazpot (talk) 16:01, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
  • The article is pretty conclusive that IvankaTrump-branded clothes are made in that factory. SlackerDelphi quoted one paragraph from the Guardian, but not the following one. Here are both in order:

    PT Buma, a Korean-owned garment company started in Indonesia in 1999, is one of the suppliers of G-III Apparel Group, the wholesale manufacturer for prominent fashion brands including Trump’s clothing.

    Many Buma workers know who Ivanka Trump is. Alia noticed her labels popping up on the clothes about a year ago.

Many fashion labels obtain their products through one or more wholesalers and don't have direct contracts with the factories. In the eyes of many customers that does not absolve them of responsibility for poor work conditions and miserable pay, and since that's bad for business many labels are now starting to pay attention to those conditions. You put your name on it, you own it! That goes for the Chinese shoe factory, too. Suggested rewording: "... which makes clothes for the G-III Apparel Group for, among others, the Ivanka Trump brand, was revealed ...". Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 07:45, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@Space4Time3Continuum2x: thank you for your perspective, and for your proposed alternative wording, which I would be happy with. For clarity, please could you state whether you support or oppose inclusion of the paragraph? Thanks! zazpot (talk) 10:05, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Support, maybe also substituting "was accused by workers of paying …" etc. for "was revealed to". Bloomberg has several recent articles on I.Trump’s "brand and its use of offshore production". Item #8 in this one mentions "her $100 million clothing line manufactured by G-III Apparel Group" which, in turn, probably farms the actual work out to several suppliers and looks for the lowest bidder. There is also Marc Fisher Footwear, "which makes Ivanka Trump shoes under license" in Chinese factories where the workers are allegedly underpaid and forced to work excessive hours and where three labor-rights activists were arrested. I’ve been meaning to update the "Business" section but I don’t have a clear picture yet of what she owns outright, what she’s licensed her name for, and what her current involvement in all these business endeavours is, what with her other day job at the White House, conflicts of interest, etc. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC) Suggested NPOV wording: In June 2017, a factory in Subang, Indonesia, which makes clothes for the G-III Apparel Group for, among others, the Ivanka Trump brand, was accused by workers of paying poverty wages, routinely requiring unpaid overtime, often verbally abusing its workers, and flouting holiday laws. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 15:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Name inconsistency

In the side bar, under the Personal Details section, it says that she was born "Ivanka Marie Trump".

However in the article body, under the Early life section, it says that she's "Ivana (called "Ivanka") Marie Trump"

So was she born "Ivanka" or was she born "Ivana"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.190.27 (talk) 03:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Is Ivanka a politician?

Ivanka has no training or education pertaining to politics. She is not "a person experienced in the art or science of government", as Merriam-Websters defines 'politician'. She is not an elected official. She is not involved in the business of governing as a profession. How on earth can she be described as a "politician"? She is a public servant, but which respectable dictionary defines the word 'politician' in a way that would accurately describe Ivanka Trump? I suggest that, unless her description as a politician can be justified, it should be permanently removed. Philo mornings (talk) 11:29, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

An advisor can be considered to be a politician, but can they be considered to be incumbent, not holding official office? Kortoso (talk) 22:40, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Name inconsistency, part deux

In the lede paragraph it says that she's "Ivanka Marie Trump"

In the body of the article, under "Early life", it says that she's "Ivana (called "Ivanka") Marie Trump". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.190.27 (talk) 12:40, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Since you guys need a roadmap, apparently - her legal name is "Ivana", therefore the lede should show "Ivana". Or alternatively "Ivana (called "Ivanka")". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.190.27 (talk) 21:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Writing

The Trump Card: Trump thanks six people "for helping me make this book happen". One of them, Daniel Paisner, who calls himself "ghost-writer to the stars", says on his website that he wrote the book "(uncredited) with Ivanka Trump". I haven't found any mention of this in secondary sources, so I didn't add the info to the article. If anyone comes across a secondary source, please add it to the article or to this Talk.
Women who work: According to secondary source WaPo, Trump's spokesperson said that Trump used some of the money she received before the election as the first two (of four) advance payments "to pay a writer, researcher and fact-checker who worked on the book". Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 19:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Image

The image of Ivanka Trump has updated. I am here to proposed the image. --219.79.227.8 (talk) 12:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

  • A (original image)
    A (original image)
  • B
    B
  • C
    C
  • D
    D
  • E
    E

Related discussion Please see the related discussion at #Photo.
@Emir of Wikipedia and Corkythehornetfan: if you want to change the image, you have to discuss on this page. --219.79.227.8 (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

It was changed to B by Corkythehornetfan with this edit. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
It is back to A. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Name

She was born as Ivana Marie Trump? Really? This must be a mistake. People do not change their first name normally. --84.152.11.217 (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Ivanka is a diminutive of Ivana as stated at Ivana. The name was not changed as far as I can tell. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

First Daughter?

Do we really need to include "First Daughter" as part of her held offices?

"First Daughter" is not particularly a role of the same magnitude of, for example, "First Lady". It's not even a role anyway, just a title - unlike the role of being a First Lady which has its duties.

Even if we gave "First Daughter" its own section in the infobox, would we really go through the trouble of listing all the criteria such as term dates and predecessors? Speaking of which, the articles of former First Daughters such as Chelsea Clinton and Amy Carter have not received such treatment.

And who would we give "First Son" to? Donald Trump Jr. for being the eldest? Or Barron Trump for being the resident White House child?

Thoughts? 144.136.140.81 (talk) 11:23, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

First Daughter is her role and title as given in the salary report. With all the other they are just merely children of presidents and not official advisers in the White House. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

What are the duties of "First Daughter?" Where's the job description in the Executive Schedule? I'm serious, where is it? 98.10.165.90 (talk) 00:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Are 'First Daughter' and 'Advisor to the President' two distinct, positions or is 'First Daughter and Advisor to the President' a single position? She's not the first 'First Daughter', but she may be the first 'Advisor to the President' (without Special, Senior, etc...). Faolin42 (talk) 01:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Business - Trump SoHo

We should add something about her role in the development of Trump Soho, as well as the resulting civil case and criminal investigation. [1] Nobodytoo (talk) 17:10, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

For some reason ProPublica's website is down. Here are two more sources. [2] [3]

Nobodytoo (talk) 19:01, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.propublica.org/article/ivanka-donald-trump-jr-close-to-being-charged-felony-fraud
  2. ^ http://www.wnyc.org/story/ivanka-donald-trump-jr-close-charged-felony-fraud/
  3. ^ https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-ivanka-trump-and-donald-trump-jr-avoided-a-criminal-indictment

First Daughter

Should we seriously indicate that she is "First Daughter" in the infobox? Besides, it's misleading because Position established suggests there have been no other first daughters before. NoMoreHeroes (talk) 03:12, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

First Daughter is what the source calls her. I will remove the position established. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Replacing image with cropped image to remove blurred head at bottom left

  • Original
    Original
  • New
    New

So since I dislike the blurred head at the bottom-left, I've created a somewhat cropped version width the same height to width ratio. Any agreement on replacing it? Galobtter (talk) 03:58, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer this image over any other. Corky Buzz by the Hornet's Nest 04:00, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps, but it doesn't seem like this image is going to be changed. So I was wondering if it could atleast be cropped. Do you support or oppose this change? Galobtter (talk) 04:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I'll support it. Corky Buzz by the Hornet's Nest 04:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I've done this since it's been about 7 days with one support and no opposition. (and it's only a minor change) Galobtter (talk) 06:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2017

She has a career as an executive vice president of The Trump Organization, fashion designer, businesswoman, author and television personality, known for serving as a boardroom judge on her father's reality TV series, The Apprentice (2006-2015). Vipul Talari 06:09, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Done Ah I see you want "has" to be changed to "as". Galobtter (talk) 06:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC) Actually someone had messed it up and I reverted to a good version. Galobtter (talk) 06:14, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ivanka Trump. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Religion

"Ivanka and her husband made a pilgrimage to the grave of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, a popular prayer site, shortly before her father's election victory.[117][122] On May 22, 2017, Ivanka and Kushner also traveled with her father on the first official visit of Israel by the Trump administration, where her father made the first visit to the Western Wall by a sitting U.S. President.[123] Ivanka also visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in western Jerusalem and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Christian Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem during the trip.[124]"

This paragraph feels a bit light in terms of important content. I'd propose cutting this paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cazer78 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Agree. Not sure if we really need all that. Perhaps there is something significant about that pilgrimage - something about her being in a certain sect, but that should be explained and shouldn't put undue weight on that either. Galobtter (talkó tuó mió) 15:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


I removed that paragraph about the Israel visit. I also clarified that she converted due to her engagement. I also removed the line about her father's support for Judaism b/c it felt a bit like propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cazer78 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Mariolis MG: Discuss here please. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:31, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Languages

"Trump is bilingual, speaking English and French, and has an elementary knowledge of her mother's native language of Czech."

Doesn't Ivanka speak Hebrew, since she converted to Judaism? And what's her Hebrew name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.119.130.208 (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Her Hebrew name is Yael, but the article doesn't say anything about if she speaks Hebrew. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:52, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

No, she is not blingual in French. What a joke. Prove it with video. Agentscully514 (talk) 02:29, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2018

Early life: Trump's parents divorced in 1992, when she was ten years old. 2404:C800:9003:8:0:0:0:13 (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:15, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 09:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Pictures

January 2017 before inauguration

There were too many pictures of the subject serving no illustrative purpose; I have removed one. Also, I would like to suggest changing the main picture to this one, which is better focused on her face, and is more recent. The current lead picture, which portrays her when presenting her child-care policy initiative, could then be used to illustrate that event (not mentioned yet in the article but probably should).

Any comments for or against the change? — JFG talk 17:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Prior discussion regarding that image and the current one took place at Talk:Ivanka_Trump/Archive_1#Photo and Talk:Ivanka_Trump/Archive_1#Image. Thanks for removing the irrelevant image though. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
I find the current image more immediately recognizable as her. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
She apparently does not wear her hair in curls any more, so let's leave the image as is. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:33, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
File:Ivanka Trump in South Korea 2018.jpg
February 2018 at the Olympics in South Korea

A picture taken at the Olympics in 2018 was added in May. Back to curls, recent, and good quality. It was stable for a month until somebody restored to the 2016 picture today; I reverted to the 2018 version, and we can discuss here whether we should really go back. — JFG talk 06:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I think the one from February 2018 is much more suitable for infobox use, and in fact, I find her more recognizable in that one, and it has more quality. Her hairstyle is really not a good reason for keeping the 2016 photo as she regularly changes her hairstyle. Keivan.fTalk 18:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 Done, added the 2018 photo. --B dash (talk) 02:52, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
2016 image is still more recognizable than the one replacing the South Korea Olympics one.Avaya1 (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2018

In the Early Life section, changed to who became the 45th President of the United States in 2017. 219.76.15.5 (talk) 08:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 08:23, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Senior Advisor to the President

@Vjmlhds: please discuss here why you want to us to call her a "Senior Advisor to the President" instead of following the WP:RSs. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia: I have 2 sources (CNBC and CNN) which note her as a senior advisor, and there's plenty more I can add as well. This isn't something I pulled out of the sky. Vjmlhds (talk) 20:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Please present the sources here so that we can discuss and gain consensus instead of engaging of verging into an edit war. It would also be nice if you revert back to the consensus version whilst the outcome of this discussion is still pending. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

[4] [5] I've added BOTH sources to the article, which if you had just taken a second and stopped to see instead of blindly reverting, you'll see I'm in the right here, and it is you who are causing the problems. Vjmlhds (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Where do these sources say that she is "Senior Advisor to the President" though? They are saying that she is an adviser who is senior, not that her title is Senior Advisor. The sources in the sources subsection show the actual title. Please revert to the consensus version instead of blindly causing problems. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
BTW...the revision before this issue began had her listed as "senior advisor", and there was no consensus on anything prior to this - only one with a hang up about this appears to be you. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
You added it with this edit [6] on the 1 February 2019. The version without senior had been longstanding since 2017 [7]. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm talking about where it stood before this current dispute, which stood for over a week before you reverted. There was no real issue prior to today. You were incorrect in saying there was "consensus", because the issue never came up until recently, as a whole bunch of sources (as I documented) refer to her as Senior advisor. You're coming off as this is some kind of personal affront. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Also, you're the only editor that seems to have a problem with this. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Are you really trying to suggest that the one week where it stood discounts the year where nobody challenged it. The sources you have provided describe her a an advisor who is senior, none of them say her title is Senior Advisor. The fact that you reverted the other editors I made in the time with no explanation instead of just changing the bit about the title does make this seem a bit like a personal affront though. And you were the only editor who seemed to have a problem with following the sources in the over a year the version without Senior was up. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:34, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
That's a you problem, then. If a third set of eyes wants to take a peak over here and chime in, I'd be fine with that, but you can't take it personal when one of your edits gets undone...price of doing business on Wikipedia. Vjmlhds (talk) 22:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm fine having a "third set of eyes" giving a view, but you still have not explained why you reverted the rest of my edits that were not related to the title of role, like the sourcing of an unsourced statement [8]. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Sources

[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]


OK....[25][26][27][28][29] I can go on and on, but then it just starts looking like a (to keep it clean) urinating contest. There are plenty of credible sources that say both. Vjmlhds (talk) 20:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
According to official WH bio, her title is Advisor to the President. She is also a senior advisor, but senior is used there as an adjective, not as her title. Bangabandhu (talk) 01:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Bangabandhu, so do you think there is consensus to revert back to my version? Perhaps adding mention that she has been described with the adjective, senior? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
What I'm finding is all of the government-related websites list her as Advisor to the President. It is the news articles that describe her as a senior advisor to her father without listing her formal title. Therefore, I agree that this necessitates a revert. KyleJoantalk 04:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
KyleJoan, are you willing to revert then? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Done! KyleJoantalk 04:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2019

First Daughter is not a recognized Federal title. It does not appear in the Order of Precedence that governs protocol rank within the government. This is a fictional title and should be removed from the page. Awrush (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: First daughter does not need to be a recognized Federal title to be used in Wikipedia. The term need only be used by a large portion of sources. The term 'First daughter' meets this requirement, as its use is widespread, having been used in the past and with other presidential daughters including Chelsea Clinton, Amy Carter and the Bush sisters.  Spintendo  09:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Well, this has been removed from the infobox (by another editor).[30] Rightfully so, as the infobox should only list office titles. No prejudice to mention that media have been calling her "first daughter" in the article body. — JFG talk 10:47, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Investigation For Felony Fraud: Trump SoHo Hotel

This is probably a controversial subject, and I'm not exactly sure how Wikipedia handles subjects like this, but I think this page should include her involvement with the Trump SoHo Hotel Project, as she was an instrumental role in it.

" In June, 2008, Donald, Jr., and Ivanka, alongside their brother Eric, gathered the foreign press at Trump Tower in Manhattan, where Ivanka announced that sixty per cent had been snapped up. “We’re in a very fortunate position where we have enough sales, and now we are strategically targeting certain buyers,” she said.

None of that was true. According to a sworn affidavit by a Trump partner filed with the New York Attorney General’s office, by March of 2010, almost two years after the press conference, only 15.8 per cent of units had been sold." Source: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-ivanka-trump-and-donald-trump-jr-avoided-a-criminal-indictment

Other sources: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/us/politics/donald-trump-soho-settlement.html https://uk.reuters.com/article/trump-investors-dollar-idUKN26147420080626 https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/travel/30checkin.html?module=inline https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/ivanka-and-donald-trump-jr-were-investigated-for-felony-fraud https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-soho-criminal-fraud-case-ivanka-don-jr-dropped-after-campaign-donation-2017-10 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/17/ivanka-trump-russia-mueller-investigation-organisation-subpoena https://www.npr.org/2017/11/07/560849787/trump-soho-a-shiny-hotel-wrapped-in-glass-but-hiding-mysteries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demtrivaldez (talk • contribs) 18:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Ivanka is incorrectly spelled Ivana throughout this article.

I could not log in on my old account (forgot password) so created a new one (forgetting I still could not edit this article). Someone needs to add 'k' to all the Ivanas, which should read Ivanka (excepting those Ivanas which are referring to her mother Ivana), since I cannot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MutualAssuredDestruction (talk • contribs)

No, the article is currently correct. Please do not edit it. Dbfirs 16:01, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Section in Early Life about Presidential Inauguration

This has zero to due with her early life and should be removed. IEditThingsForYou (talk) 21:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree ~ not removed but moved to 2016 presidential campaign and election ~mitch~ (talk) 22:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Moved to 2016 presidential campaign and election section ~mitch~ (talk) 21:01, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Parents were married

In this diff [31] User:Trillfendi you sound personally offended or something ("Stop. Just stop"). Please know this is not the case to upset or offend you. It is normal in biography articles to clarify that the parents were married. Indeed, Ivanka Trump was not born out of wedlock, her parents were married. The easiest way to convey this information is by saying they were married. So I am confused by your reversions of this information. How might we resolve this? -- GreenC 21:15, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@GreenC: It wasn’t personal offense to the obvious fact that they were married but more to the manual of style for the scope of the WikiProject(s) this article is involved in. For a while now I’ve been correcting it yet for some reason people insist on putting it back. Long story short, it’s not particularly relevant how many times the man has been married, Ivana Trump is notable for her own career therefore you have to lead with that career rather than that gendered ownership language which WikiProject says. Trillfendi (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
The article is about Ivanka Trump not Ivana. The sentence is about Ivanka's parents (plural). It is important to note that her parents were married when naming them. I don't know anything about gendered ownership language, the sentence is attempting to communicate that her parents were married. Can you please find a way to clarify that her parents were married. -- GreenC 02:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Who the fuck cares. It truly does not matter when describing someone as progeny. Tiffany is no different. If that were the case you're going to have to go through every child of a famous person's article and put this "first wife" bullshit instead of the standard of their job. Stella McCartney, Zoë Kravitz, Lily Collins, Michael Douglas, Wolfgang Van Halen, Colin Hanks, countless examples exist. So for every man that has ever been divorced that now has to preface their notability. This is called sexism. Trillfendi (talk) 03:48, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I get that it doesn't matter to you, but it matters to people if she was born out of wedlock and the way it's currently worded it's unclear if her parents were married or not. If you don't like 'first wife' there must be another way to word it. I'm giving you the opportunity to find a way to say that her parents were married. It is conspicuously missing which is an open question creating a BLP problem. -- GreenC 16:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • It's not about gender; in those cases, both parents have independently notable careers. Ivana Trump does not. Look at how sparse the section on her career is in our article on her - and that absolutely does reflect the sources, which mostly cover her from the perspective of "here's what Donald Trump's ex-wife is doing." If someone is primarily notable for who they married, we have to cover them with that in mind - we don't automatically treat their career as noteworthy. Portuguese television journalist Jorge Arantes, for instance, doesn't get an article just because he was previously married to J. K. Rowling; Neil Murray, her second husband, is a doctor (a perfectly respectable career), but it's not what he's famous for. --Aquillion (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Ivana Trump is not notable for her own career; in fact, if she hadn't married Trump, it is extremely unlikely she would pass WP:BIO - there are zero sources on her article from before her marriage to Trump, while virtually every single source there seems to in some form exist because of who she married (even in the ones about her career, she is uniformly introduced as "Donald Trump's ex-wife", because that's what makes her notable and is the reason she was being covered.) In her own article, her career is a comparatively minor part of a biography that focuses primarily on her relationship with Trump; and, more importantly, we had to write it that way, since the sources to that article are almost all about Donald Trump, or cover her based on her relationship with Trump. --Aquillion (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 July 2019

Change political party from Independent to Republican (formerly Independent). According to New York Voter Registration Records, Ivanka is a Republican (REP). This is the source: https://stevemorse.org/nysvoters/nysvoters.html

If you search "Ivanka Trump" in the search boxes, her information will come up.

Here is a screenshot of the source: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1oIIIpu5Syzx_-HSnb5XuhU6ELb5CSbgasvjrhEyp_TU/edit?usp=sharing

Thanks! -Jack TheRealJackMarshall (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

 Not done That’s called original research. That information has to come from an independent, reliable source. Trillfendi (talk) 17:10, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Should the lead section say Ivanka's parents were married?

THE LEAD SECTION SHOULD SAY IVANKA'S PARENTS WERE MARRIED

There is a clear consensus that the lead section should say: "She is the daughter and second child of President Donald Trump and his first wife, Ivana."

Editors found the "Donald Trump and his first wife, Ivana" wording to be the simplest language. RfC participants noted that both Ivana Trump and Ivanka Trump are notable because of Donald Trump.

Editors found the "formerly married President Donald Trump and model Ivana Trump" wording to be awkwardly worded and the "Donald Trump and model Ivana Trump" wording to be problematic language because it could imply that the two were not married when Ivanka Trump was born.

Bangabandhu noted that Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. do not have the "Donald Trump and his first wife, Ivana" wording, and R2 suggested changing those articles also. I recommend that editors boldly edit those articles to have the same wording as this one and if those changes are contested, then opening RfCs on those articles' talk pages.

Cunard (talk) 08:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

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 the lead section say that Donald and Ivana Trump (parents of Ivanka Trump) were married? -- GreenC 00:16, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Specifically to resolve this 16-month revert series by one user:

More discussion above in Talk:Ivanka_Trump#Parents_were_married. -- GreenC 00:16, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Survey

  • Support as nom, and seeding survey. I attempted compromise wording June 25: "She is the daughter and second child of formerly married President Donald Trump and model Ivana Trump", but it got reverted by a different user back to the "first wife" language. We need to establish some consensus to avoid this slow motion edit warring. It is also a BLP problem, there is no clarity that her parents were married it opens questions if she was born out of wedlock ie. illegitimate. -- GreenC 00:16, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I Support your edit ~ 'She is the daughter and second child of formerly married President Donald Trump and model Ivana Trump"," I've been watching, and I can only chuckle ~ back and forth etc.. ~ I'm glad we can finally resolve this issue ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 00:23, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I went to Maureen Reagan and found the following: Maureen Elizabeth Reagan (January 4, 1941 – August 8, 2001) was the first child of U.S. President Ronald Reagan and his first wife, actress Jane Wyman. I suggest something similar here.Adoring nanny (talk) 01:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep the lead simple per Maureen Reagan example. The compromise wording is awkward. A more detailed description can be laid out under Early life. Glendoremus (talk) 05:29, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Comment Some people will say to this "other stuff exists" but I think it is a good point nonetheless. However: Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. do not mention "first wife" before Ivanka. I don't know why Ivana's page would be treated any differently than her siblings. Bangabandhu (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Well for what it is worth she is a different gender, and so people's implicit biases may be showing. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:02, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
It would be best not to make unfounded accusations of sexism. I personally think Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. should be changed too. R2 (bleep) 20:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. It's important not to suggest that Ivanka might have been born out of wedlock. The least awkward wording is Donald Trump and his first wife, Ivana Trump. Ivana is much better known as Trump's first wife than as a former model. The "first wife" language also helps to situate Ivanka among her half-siblings. R2 (bleep) 19:27, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. I can understand the argument that automatically listing her mother's marital relationship with Trump as the primary descriptor would be sexist, especially in a situation where the mother or the article's subject are independently notable; but that isn't the case here. In this particular case, both Ivanka and Ivana's notability is primarily derived from their relation to Trump, so it makes sense to emphasize it in the lead and lay it out as early as possible. Ivana is not primarily famous for being a model. --Aquillion (talk) 00:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support If her parents were married when she was born (from what I understand, they were) I don't really understand what the issue is about saying so other than some political correctness going on. Implying that her parents were somehow not married at the time would be far worse than any other concerns. StonyBrook (talk) 00:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support simplest language, such as "daughter of Donald Trump and his first wife, Ivana". Stating that Ivana was Donald's first wife helps readers understand the family context; not mentioning Trump's presidency makes sense because he was not president at the time, and not even a politician; not mentioning Ivana being a model makes sense because she did not have much of a modeling career. Finally, the reverting editor cites an essay, which is neither a policy nor a guideline, so that we must per policy refer to Ivana's portrayal in a majority of sources about her, ergo she is mostly notable as Trump's first wife. — JFG talk 07:41, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose (Apparently I now have to point that this is not a “separate” discussion. But common sense isn’t common) You people are simply not understanding that saying she is daughter of President Donald Trump and model Ivana Trump instead of saying she is the daughter of President Trump and “his first wife” is ADHERENCE TO THE MANUAL OF STYLE FOR WIKIPROJECT WOMEN which this article is apart of. Read it. No other article delineates in the lead what the marital status of someone’s famous parents were (except maybe Henry, Duke of Cornwall but for crying out loud the king married 3 Catherines and 2 Annes) or which marriage they were on. Not for Mariska Hargitay, not for Sean Lennon, not for Zoë Kravitz, not for Lily Collins, not for Stephen Curry. I can keep going all night. Nobody cares which number wife she was, besides Ivana Trump herself. Trillfendi (talk) 01:15, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Is the essay Wikipedia:Writing about women the one you refer to? At the very least we have here a written guide on how to mention someone's parents, seeing that there doesn't appear to be anything on the subject at MOS:BIO. As I understand it, the advice given therein seems to be, do certain things whenever possible without having to bend over backwards to do it. I would like to find a way to impart to the reader the information that Ivanka's mother a) was married to Donald at the time of her birth and b) is not presently married to him/not the First Lady, to anyone coming to this encyclopedia to learn (if everyone knew this already, why bother saying anything about it or even have an article?) Saying model makes things complicated, so I'm ok with leaving out president. If saying first wife or former wife is offensive to some, why not try She is the daughter of and second child born to Ivana, who was then married to Donald Trump. This might be bending over backwards a little but if it conveys the point without stirring up drama then so be it. StonyBrook (talk) 06:10, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
An essay is neither policy nor a binding guideline. There's nothing sexist about describing Ivana Trump as Donald Trump's first wife, because her marriage is the main reason of her notability, as reported by zillions of sources over decades. Likewise, Philip May is mostly known as Theresa May's husband, and Joachim Sauer is mostly known as Angela Merkel's husband: his article even states: Because of his wife's political career, Sauer has received far more media attention than is usual for a research scientist. On several occasions he has stated that he is not fond of this publicity. — JFG talk 07:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Are you gonna go change Sean Lennon’s lead to say he is the son of John Lennon and his second wife Yoko Ono? Or even better... the son of Yoko Ono and her third husband? Are you gonna change Paloma Picasso’s lead to say she is the daughter of Pablo Picasso and his 4th mistress Françoise Gilot? Not only does it sound superfluous and ridiculous, marital status is immaterial to someone else’s life’s lead. That’s the point. If they wanna to bore someone with those biographical details of failed marriages (or partnerships) they could do so in the early life section and talk about how reporters were asking about her dad’s sex life when he cheated on her mother. Or that information is readily available on his article. Even little Barron Trump doesn’t have this “third wife” idiocy prefacing his name. At any rate, nobody goddamn cares which marriage it was. Obviously she isn’t Marla Maples’s daughter and obviously she’s not Melania Trump’s daughter. Just leave well enough alone. Ivana’s occupation was modeling, not being a housewife. (And even if she was, it would only say she is the daughter of Donald Trump and Ivana Trump. Even Liv Tyler’s paternity was disputed yet doesn’t have this unnecessary lint in her lead, but that’s a Good Article so I wouldn’t expect anyone to learn from that.) Trillfendi (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
You missed the part where I wrote: because her marriage is the main reason of her notability. Yoko Ono and Françoise Gilot were independently notable artists. See also WP:WAX. — JFG talk 20:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Françoise Gilot was not an independently notable artist (or even an artist at all rather than a law school dropout) by the time she started her affair with Pablo Picasso at age 21. That’s revisionism. Neither when she left him 10 years later. Trillfendi (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
An essay (not "THE MANUAL OF STYLE FOR WIKIPROJECT WOMEN," as claimed) is not the Bible, and we're not obligated to follow it. The most salient difference between this article and the others pointed to by Trillfendi is that both Ivanka and Ivana are only notable because they're Donald's ex-wife and daughter. And lots and lots of people care which number wife Ivana was, as evidenced by the thousands of articles over the years that have described her as Dona'd "first wife." I also don't really appreciate Trillfendi's comment that "we people" just don't understand and the insinuation that if we did, then we'd necessarily agree with them. R2 (bleep) 18:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
It’s a good thing I don’t believe in the Bible. But if “essays” aren’t practical then why do people love to pull out other stuff exists (an essay) as if it’s law. Trillfendi (talk) 18:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Some essays have garnered more community acceptance than others. R2 (bleep) 18:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Besides, I like WP:NOTBYRELATION. But as it acknowledges, A woman's relationships are inevitably discussed prominently when essential to her notability. R2 (bleep) 18:42, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Still trying to figure out how "parents were married" has anything to do with the sentence. Trillfendi (talk) 22:11, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per the elegant example text used at Maureen Reagan and kindly supplied by Adoring nanny. I think it's important and easy to convey that Trump and Ivana were married at the time but no longer are now. I also can't understand the argument against this wording — references to all the other articles we will need to change are unconvincing, especially since the bot called me to this article, and not to others. -Darouet (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support, it would be surprising to omit such a key part of her life, and the one thing most people would know about her. Gleeanon409 (talk) 03:00, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
What’s seems to be lost here is not that her parents were indeed married at the time of her birth (in other news, grass is green) but that this isn’t a leadworthy statement, there should be a unilateralism amongst all children, including the half-siblings Barron and the one whose "parents weren't married" Tiffany, and that Ivana should be described by her actual job title rather than as someone’s wife in that space. Why is it applicable to one but not the other 4. Trillfendi (talk) 03:19, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
You May be right that those articles need to change in some way, my opinion is only on this one. Also, the lead is too short. Gleeanon409 (talk) 04:34, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. There's a strong enough of history of people being born out of wedlock being stigmatized (though that's greatly improved) that I am weakly supportive of mentioning it. (Summoned by bot)  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 04:50, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Quick, someone change Leonardo da Vinci's lead. And make sure people know his mother was a slave. Then do Alexander Hamilton. The founding father was a bastard. (Or we can recognize that none of this trivial modicum was at all consequential to their life, as evidenced.) Trillfendi (talk) 05:44, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
@Trillfendi: You've made your point loud and clear, no need to repeat your arguments further, that's not helping your cause. Please read WP:BLUDGEON. — JFG talk 08:53, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
The only cause here is common sense and anti-hypocrisy. I said what I said. Therefore I couldn’t care less. Oh look another essay! Trillfendi (talk) 03:56, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: Apologies for not reading this thread sooner. My objection to the word "model" is simple: It's incorrect. She was a model many years ago but she hasn't worked in the profession since her marriage to Trump in 1977. It hasn't been her actual job title in 42 years. I already removed it completely earlier, and I have just done the same on Jr.'s and Eric's pages; I'm good with putting "first wife" back on this page and on the other two or not, and I'm strongly opposed to "model." I'm at a loss as to what to replace it with, and I'm the current top editor on Ivana's page. Since Ivana's name links to her page, I don't see that we need any definition. I can't speak for any other editors; for my part, "first wife" was not a reflection on Ivanka being born in or out of wedlock or on Ivana's life or personal (worth/value?), it was just a designation to say that Trump's been married three times and she was Seven of Nine first of three. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 16:37, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Space4Time3Continuum2x here: readers can click on the wikilink to learn more about Ivana if they wish, without being informed that she is a "former model." -Darouet (talk) 02:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Then why not just leave it as "Ivana Trump". A lot of these adages are obsolete. I think we all agree on that. The reader is welcome to read her article if they are interested. Because if we're taking the order of succession route Donald was Ivana's second husband. Trillfendi (talk) 21:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support saying wife and "Donald Trump and his first wife, Ivana Trump" seem a bit better. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 03:18, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

Please use this section for Comment and to have discussions about above survey !votes. -- GreenC 18:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I tried. [32] R2 (bleep) 19:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Clean survey sections are easier for others to follow without getting distracted, it benefits everyone (including Trillfendi in this case). And is procedure standard per WP:RFC. And it is democratic. Everyone gets an equal opportunity to leave their !vote without the sort of gamesmanship that happens with inline responses in the survey section. It's like how voting stations disallow stumping for a candidate beyond a certain point, your are safe from people trying to sway your vote. Occasionally they are OK for corrections of factual errors but mega threads get out of control because people feel more invested when its inside the survey section they don't back down so easily and creates a negative atmosphere. -- GreenC 22:52, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Now this is an actual comment; if the marital status of Trump’s wives are so “important” to the lead of Ivanka, what will be the case of Tiffany Trump? Her parents weren’t married when she was born. What now. Tiffany Trump is the daughter of Donald Trump and the woman who got pregnant from having an affair, whom he married two months later? That’s how absurd this is. Trillfendi (talk) 03:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
No, Tiffany Trump is fine the way it is now per the above. No need to call extra attention to where it isn't needed or wanted. StonyBrook (talk) 03:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
So if Tiffany Trump is fine as the child of “US President Donald Trump and Marla Maples” why must Ivanka Trump be “the daughter of President Donald Trump and his first wife Ivana”. It isn’t like Marla Maples was the higher profile person in that situation (she was the mistress after all). Trillfendi (talk) 03:35, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Maples is not Trump, so there's less confusion about her marital status. But I'm starting to repeat myself. StonyBrook (talk) 03:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Why would anyone be confused about Trump’s marital status to begin with? And why is it even relevant. If someone is really that concerned about it, she’s got her own page detailing all 4 marriages. For anyone to ponder whether she was still married to Donald at the time of her kids’ birth, despite the divorce not happening until a decade later, is pointless. But math is hard. Trillfendi (talk) 04:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
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.

"Yael Kushner"?

Is there any evidence whatsoever that this is her legal name? I've only ever seen her called (both by herself and others) "Ivanka Trump". Jews frequently have a Hebrew name for religious purposes in addition to a secular name, and the secular name is their legal name. Is there any actual proof that she is legally "Yael Kushner"? After all, we don't say that Jared Kushner is really "Yoel Chaim Kushner" (which is his Hebrew name) Lovesaver (talk) 06:14, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I have restored the long-term stable version of the intro sentence until the present discussion reaches consensus. Wikipedia goes by WP:COMMONNAME, not official or religious names, so that I think the proposed change is unwarranted. No objection to mentioning her religious name later in the sentence. — JFG talk 09:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
First, I should say upfront that I'm not convinced "Yael Kushner" is actually her legal name, so (given the lack of coverage) we shouldn't use it. That said, MOS:FULLNAME is actually confusingly-worded on this point. (It might require some clarification.) It says In some cases, subjects have had their full names changed at some point after birth. In these cases the birth name should be given in the lead as well, but it doesn't specify how or which one should be given prominence (as noted, I'm dubious that her name was legally changed, and she doesn't seem to publicly use Yael, so it's hard to see a justification for including it here.) MOS:LEGALNAME says For people who are best known by a pseudonym, the legal name should usually appear first in the article, followed closely by the pseudonym., but (keeping in mind that we have no evidence that this is her legal name), even if it were, I would say that if the possibility for exceptions implied by that 'usually' ever applies, this would be a case to apply it. I'm inclined to say that, absent any indication that this is her legal name, and absent any indication that she publicly uses or prefers it, it's just a non-notable Hebrew pseudonym and therefore not something that should be covered in the lead (only notable pseudonyms go there.) --Aquillion (talk) 10:10, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Lovesaver has been consistently doing this sort of thing re: Judaism across many articles, usually without sourcing or source-hijacking. They are prominently naming people as Jewish in the lead section. It must be held to a high bar of sourcing quality and demonstrate an understanding of our naming guidelines and self-identity guidelines. -- GreenC 13:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
I've never made any other Judaism-related edits Lovesaver (talk) 02:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
I think you misread Lovesaver's comment. Regardless of what they said on other articles, in this one they're arguing against using "Yael Kushner" in the lead, on account of us not having any sources supporting the idea that it's her legal name. --Aquillion (talk) 05:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Then I am confused. -- GreenC 15:19, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
You've confused me as well! Are LissanX and Lovesaver the same person? --Aquillion (talk) 17:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Ah! Two red link users editing at the same time on the same thing got me confused. Carry on :) -- GreenC 18:19, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
It seems like LissanX is doing this to a lot of Trump-related articles, he edited Vanessa Trump and Lara Trump to say that they were Jewish, even though neither of them is. Lovesaver (talk) 02:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Why is this still there anyway? The fact that it's sourced to a single tabloid article should be grounds enough for it to be removed based on these suspicions alone. Knr5 (talk) 03:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Photo of Ivanka and Trump at Wedding

Trump is in the center of the picture. If you crop the picture exactly in half horizontal-wise, one of Trump's eyes remain. Claiming that Trump is "far-right" in the picture is a facetious way to call Trump "far-right" in a political context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike9377 (talk • contribs) 08:29, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Hebrew name in lead

Whether or not Ivanka Trump took the Hebrew name "Yael" for religious purposes, it is not a name she is "known as." It is, at best, an answer to a trivia question. The sources offered below to support that she took the name at all are not particularly specific. (What, if anything, did she say on The View with regard to her name?) The discussion of this a year ago was sidetracked by username confusion and I don't see that it made any case for featuring the Hebrew name so prominently. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Agree this should go into footnotes, or just be mentioned in the Religion section. Can't find an online version of that View source, can't find other good sources about this. Does not appear to be a legal name, this source just calls it a moniker. – Thjarkur (talk) 23:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 Done Removed from lead section. feminist (talk) 12:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2020

In 2012, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. were investigated by the Major Economic Crimes Bureau for misleading investors who bought property at the Trump SoHo. They escaped felony fraud charges when District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. dropped the criminal case after a private meeting with Trump lawyer Marc Kasowitz, who had made a $25,000 donation to Vance’s re-election campaign.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/ivanka-and-donald-trump-jr-were-investigated-for-felony-fraud?fbclid=IwAR0bvELajJ-x7tgK7NRUxeT9W_oG6sFZ3J8cc5HaBtRX4qcFrQJRvg6JbGU Kakooljay (talk) 02:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ivanka_Trump/Archive_1&oldid=1092053128"