Talk:Andrew Jackson

Template:Vital article

Missing text

In the section "Movies" please include The Buccaneer (1958) with Yul Brinner as Jean Laffite and Charlton Heston as Andrew Jackson.

The Amelia Island Affair and the first Seminole war are totally obviated in this article. Andrew Jackson was a man who treated Davy Crockett meanly. He played dirty tricks on him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:BD02:AF00:21E:52FF:FEC5:9E8C (talk) 15:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Regrets section

I moved this section to the talk page. Unnecessary for the article.

Regrets

On the last day of the presidency, Jackson admitted that he had but two regrets, that he "had been unable to shoot Henry Clay or to hang John C. Calhoun."

Popular Culture: Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson

I think that the "Popular culture depictions" section should make reference to the musical Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, seeing that it is a musical depiction of the life of Jackson. Thoughts? Branman275 (talk) 16:10, 30 March 2015 (UTC) pooppppppppppppppppppppooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooopppppppppppppppppppppppp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.112.73 (talk) 22:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

An incorrect name in section 8.11 U.S. Exploring Expedition

In section 8.11 U.S. Exploring Expedition, an exploration expedition that took place from 1817 to 1823 on the Red River of the North is credited to have been led by Stephen H. Harriman. His name is actually Stephen Harriman Long. The link with the name "Stephen H. Harriman" redirects to the biography of Col. Stephen Harriman Long, expedition leader; topographical engineer and namesake of Longs Peak Colorado, among other things. Dhpierre (talk) 17:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC) Dhpierre

Picture

I suggest you change the picture of Andrew Jackson on the main sidebar from a painting to an actual daguerreotype photograph of him, numerous ones exist, and they are more likely to accurately represent his appearance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avrand6 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

political party

shouldn't that be in the first paragraph? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.131.237 (talk) 00:14, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Jackson was a strong leader; his article needs a strong lead

The lead has to help readers who are taking only a short glance of the article to learn the most important things about Andrew Jackson. It does not do that now, it opens with trivia: He was born near the end of the colonial era, somewhere near the then-unmarked border between North and South Carolina, into a recently immigrated Scots-Irish farming family of relatively modest means. During the American Revolutionary War Jackson, whose family supported the revolutionary cause, acted as a courier. He was captured, at age 13, and mistreated by his British captors. What we need is an opening that will immediately tell at a glance why is important. So let's try this:

proposed: Historian Sellers says "Andrew Jackson's masterful personality was enough by itself to make him one of the most controversial figures ever to stride across the American stage."[1] His most controversial presidential actions included removal of the Indians from the southeast, the destruction of the Bank of the United States, and his threat to use military force against the state of South Carolina to make it stop nullifying federal laws. Not at all controversial was his great victory over the British at New Orleans in the last battle of the War of 1812. He was the main founder of the modern Democratic Party and its iconic hero; he was always a fierce partisan, with many friends and many enemies. Rjensen (talk) 02:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

If one were to write a biography of Andrew Jackson and wanted to open with that as its introduction, that would be fine. However, saying one has a "masterful" personality, and using indistinct language like "fierce partisan, with many friends and many enemies" does not fit the encyclopedic tone that Wikipedia utilizes. I am sympathetic to your argument that there is some trivia in the current lead, and it certainly could be reworked, however we cannot use hyperbole and such like historians have free rein to do -- we must simply summarize the article. Go Phightins! 02:55, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

No hyperbole is used, just straight simple, plain, noncontroversial facts, plus a quotation from a leading scholar (Sellars). It tells what he was most noted for (removal of the Indians, destruction of the bank of the United States, nullification crisis, Battle of New Orleans, founding the Democratic Party, and his personality). Rjensen (talk) 02:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

OK, well at the very least, "He was always a fierce partisan, with many friends and many enemies" -- although I will certainly stipulate that is true -- is not really the tone Wikipedia articles are to have. I am fine with the content of the controversial presidential actions section, although I am not really sure how his victory at New Orleans was uncontroversial; controversy certainly exists in regards to what he should or should not have done. We can't really call him an "iconic hero", at least not unless we attribute that point of view to a leading historian or something. Go Phightins! 03:04, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

1) the tone is designed to capture AJ's very pugnacious personality As reflected by the RS. 2) iconic = for the last century the main annual celebration and fundraising event in the Democratic Party is called the "the Jefferson-Jackson Day" [says Nick Ragone. Presidential leadership ] 3) The Miller Center at U Virginia bio says: "Strong-willed and sharp-tempered, a fierce patriot and rabid partisan, Jackson was always controversial" 4) "But if Jackson was a terrible enemy, he was also the most faithful of friends. Many men feared and hated him; many also loved him" says William Garrott Brown, Andrew Jackson p 40. Rjensen (talk) 03:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Slave descendants?

In the section "Hermitage plantation," the article now contains this: "The next year he acquired the Hermitage, a 640-acre (259 ha) plantation in Davidson County, near Nashville. Jackson later added 360 acres (146 ha) to the plantation, which eventually grew to 1,050 acres (425 ha). The primary crop was cotton, grown by enslaved workers. Starting with nine slaves, Jackson held as many as 44 by 1820, and later held up to 150 slaves, making him among the planter elite. Throughout his lifetime Jackson may have owned as many as 300 slaves."

Mention is made of Jackson's children and step-children. But, since Andrew Jackson was a slave owner and sympathized with the agrarian Southern economy and way of life, the 21st-Century reader of the article might wonder if Jackson had children by any of the enslaved women. Does anyone here know this?Joel Russ (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

erasing sourced edits

Historian7 has erased wholesale dozens of sourced edits added by numerous scholars. He gives no explanation either here or in the edit summary. Perhaps he can explain what he is up to? Rjensen (talk) 17:08, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

No, I erased an edit made by you because it was commentary and resembled a personal essay.Historian7 (talk) 01:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

nonsense. "Personal essays" is one that that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinions of experts). All the material deleted were statements by experts, with multiple citations. to eleven different RS -- that is vandalism . Here are the cites RS you deleted all at once:

1. Gary Scott Smith (2015). Religion in the Oval Office: The Religious Lives of American Presidents. Oxford UP. p. 151.
2. Francis Paul Prucha, "Andrew Jackson's Indian policy: a reassessment." Journal of American History (1969) 56#3 pp 527-539. in JSTOR
3. Zinn called him "exterminator of Indians." Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States (1980) p 130
4. See also Barbara Alice Mann (2009). The Tainted Gift: The Disease Method of Frontier Expansion. ABC-CLIO. p. 20.
5. Paul R. Bartrop and Steven Leonard Jacobs (2014). Modern Genocide: The Definitive Resource and Document Collection. ABC-CLIO. p. 2070.
6. Jon Meacham, American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House (2008)
7. H.W. Brands, Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times (2006)
8. Sean Wilentz (2006). The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln. Norton. p. 324.
9. Steve Inskeep, "Jackson's Reputation has Changing Again," History Network News 7 June, 2015
10. By Abby Ohlheiser, "This group wants to banish Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill," Washington Post 3 March, 2015
11. Jillian Keenan, "Kick Andrew Jackson Off the $20 Bill! The seventh president engineered genocide. He should be vilified, not honored," SLATE 3 March, 2014. Rjensen (talk) 02:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Precisely, "personal essay" is one that states ones particular feelings about a topic. This is exactly what you have done (as well as violate NPOV), by cherry picking sources that support one particular view about this topic, and which use inflammatory rhetoric to do so.

If your sources weren't so skewed towards one particular viewpoint, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Instead, you use sources that have the same view on this topic, and cite them as if that makes this impartial.Historian7 (talk) 03:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)