This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
Andrew Jackson is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges articles
Text and/or other creative content from Andrew Jackson, Sr. was copied or moved into Andrew Jackson with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
Andrew Jackson, Sr. was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 31 January 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Andrew Jackson. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Shira Klein (June 14, 2023). "The shocking truth about Wikipedia's Holocaust disinformation". The Forward. Retrieved June 16, 2023. A similar disinformation campaign is taking place in Wikipedia's articles on Native American history, where influential editors misrepresent sources to the effect of erasing Native history and whitewashing American settler colonial violence. The Wikipedia article on Andrew Jackson, plagued by such manipulations, attracts thousands of readers a day.
Kyle Keeler (2023-2-23). "How Wikipedia Erases Indigenous History". Slate. Retrieved 2023-12-1. A behind-the-scenes battle raged at Wikipedia last fall. The conflict stretched over three months and three separate pages, tallying more than 40,000 words. It began in August, when editor FinnV3 went to the "talk" page (where revisions are discussed by editors) for Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States. FinnV3 claimed that Andrew Jackson's Indian Removal Act was ethnic cleansing and that the page needed to reflect that reality, rather than calling Jackson's policy "forced removal." According to FinnV3, the phrase forced removal presented a sanitized, unrepresentative view of history that did not match scholarship. Other users disagreed. Display name 99, who has added the second most information to the page (20,085 characters—in addition to writing nearly half of U.S. President John Adams' page), argued that Jackson "wanted the Indians to be treated well" and that although his decision to remove Native peoples was "tragic," it was "necessary." After months of back and forth, "ethnic cleansing" was added to the article in October.{{cite news}}: Check date values in: |access-date= and |date= (help)
Jackson is ranked by scholars almost always closely trailing or slightly ahead of Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. Reagan and Clinton's pages have them listed as "middle to upper tier" whereas Jackson's rating is currently written as "above average". I move to have Jackson's wikipedia page written more accurately to reflect where historians and scholars actually have him, which would be written as "middle to upper tier". 2603:6011:5905:28A7:DC6:6970:B357:C89A (talk) 01:41, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, my source is not wikipedia, my source is the collection of scholarly rankings presented on that wikipedia page. If you look at the numbers, Andrew Jackson tends to be around #20. Reagan and Clinton both tend to be nearby (#16 to #22 range). On both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton's wikipedia pages, their historical ranking is worded exactly the same as "middle to upper tier". Andrew Jackson, going by the numbers of historians and scholars in the chart presented via the link is middle to upper tier. Quite frankly, I think "middle to upper tier" is odd wording for all 3 as all 3 presidents consistently rank above the median (the median here would be #23 considering there have been 45 US presidents). Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan should both have their bios re-written as "above average", or Andrew Jackson should have his written as "middle to upper tier" as all 3 presidents rank very similarly. 2603:6011:5905:28A7:BC:1A74:674B:865F (talk) 09:07, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
okay, so I did the math to get the average for each of these 3 presidents (I'm very bored).
Of the 25 surveys that include Andrew Jackson, he is ranked on average as the 12.28th best US president.
Of the 21 surveys that include Ronald Reagan, he is ranked on average as the 13.9th best US president.
Of the 19 surveys that include Bill Clinton, he is ranked on average as the 17.3rd best US president.
There have been 45 US presidents (remember, Glover Cleveland was president twice), the median is the number in the middle of a list of numbers. The median number for US presidents is 23. In other words, 22 presidents are above average, 22 presidents are below average (sort of, median and average are different but in this context it works). Any president who is consistently ranked at #22 or above should be considered an "above average" president.
Summarizing Bill Clinton as "middle to upper tier" is fine though "above average" seems more fitting. Summarizing Ronald Reagan as "middle to upper tier" is simply not accurate. He is historically ranked as clearly upper tier.
One could be symmetrical(sp?) and look at like this.. presidents ranked #1-#15 are upper tier, #16-#30 are mid tier, and #31-#45 are lower tier.
Considering Reagan and Jackson are only 1.6 ranking points apart, it would be inaccurate to state Jackson was "above average" while Reagan was "middle to upper tier" as that indicates one is viewed as clearly > than the other when I've just show that that is not the case here. 2603:6011:5905:28A7:BC:1A74:674B:865F (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jackson ranks higher than I suspected. Recency-bias effected my perception as his regard has been sliding in recent years.
In light of this information, I move to instead keep Andrew Jackson's wording as "above average", to change Ronald Reagan's from "middle to upper tier" to "above average", and to change Bill Clinton's from "middle to upper tier" to "above average". 2603:6011:5905:28A7:BC:1A74:674B:865F (talk) 09:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you point out, Jackson is generally ranked above average. The Jackson wording in the lead, which summarizes the article, states this. The section of the article that the lead summarizes, which is near the end of the article, gives more detail, in particular that Jackson's rating are historically high but have recently been dropping.
What I'm less sure of is whether it should be in the lead. Though Jackson was engaged in treating enslaved people as commodities, including buying and selling, which was part of his being a plantation slave owner, he says he gave up his role of being involved in the business of trading in slaves before 1800 he became involved in national politics. So while there's no doubt he was involved in the business of trading early in his life and it should be mentioned, it doesn't seem like it wasn't part of his professional identity, like it was for someone like Nathan Bedford Forrest.
So, my own thought is that it should go in the article, maybe early in the Legal career and marriage section, but not necessarily in the lead. I'd like to hear your thoughts, as well as gather the consensus of those who watch this page. Wtfiv (talk) 07:41, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, based on the sources presented, that it should be placed in the article. The lead should be for specific events and those things which he is most notable for. I'm not sure this would qualify. There is so much material on this very controversial former president and soldier. I doubt the article could contain every aspect of his life in great detail without risk of becoming so verbose again. I would include it as Wtfiv mentions and proceed from there. --ARoseWolf11:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wtfiv@ARoseWolf legal career and marriage section sounds great and Cheathem's article would be a good source to cite. I'll wait a day or so in case anyone else wants to weigh in. Anyone else who wants to edit between now and then, please go to town--I don't feel particularly comfortable editing this article! That said, my gut (and a close reading of the fragmentary detail we have) suggests to me he was trading to some extent for the better part of 20 years (~1790–~1810). Perhaps eventually scholars will be able to shed more light on this huge question for which there are few clear answers. jengod (talk) 15:12, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We could also just edit/add a clause in the slavery section:
Jackson also participated in the local slave trade.
>>
Jackson was also an [[Andrew Jackson and the slave trade in the United States|early speculator]] in the [[slave trade in the United States|North American slave trade]], trafficking people between Nashville and the [[Natchez District]] of [[Spanish West Florida]] via the [[Natchez Trace]]. jengod (talk) 15:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The couple spent time together in the lower Mississippi River valley, where Jackson owned a trading post and racetrack, and was an [[Andrew Jackson and the slave trade in the United States|early speculator]] in the [[slave trade in the United States|North American slave trade]], trafficking people between Nashville and the [[Natchez District]] of [[Spanish West Florida]] via the [[Natchez Trace]].
After the separation, Jackson and Rachel became romantically involved, living together as husband and wife. The couple spent time together in the lower Mississippi River valley, where Jackson owned a trading post and racetrack, and where he worked as a "negro speculator", trafficking people between Nashville and the Natchez District of Spanish West Florida via the Natchez Trace. Robards petitioned for divorce in 1790 [?], which was granted on the basis of Rachel's infidelity.jengod (talk) 19:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a sentence. I put it at the end of the paragraph preceding the one describing Jackson and Rachel, as it looks like he was already into the trade in 1788, before he became involved with Rachel. Changed the language to stay close the language of the sources. "trafficking" changed to "transporting" as the trade wasn't illegal. (Though as Remini's article points out, as well as the Wikipedia article on Jackson and the slave trade, he most likely participated in activities that were at least in the gray zone if not further. I put Cheathem as the reference for the first half. Used Remini's journal article on Jackson and the Natchez trace as a source on the second half. Also added the date of the divorce and used Remini's vol 1 as a source for it. Wtfiv (talk) 01:53, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
