This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, 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
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
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
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
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
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)
The recently added quote about Jackson's justification of the bank war. One of the reasons the article had been submitted to review was its length. The block quote adds more words, and may give a sense of Jackson's writing style, but doesn't say more than the article states.
The short sentence preceding the block quote, which is supported by secondary source, makes the point that Jackson justified it as protecting people from the wealthy, so the extended block quote from a primary source (Jackson) doesn't add new information.
Jackson's writings and style is fascinating, but part of this article's format is that it avoids block quotes and their length, particularly if the summary information is given in the text. If readers want to get a sense of Jackson's writing style, the article later gives links to his letters. There may also be a place for the direct quote in the article on the Banking War, which is focused specifically on the issue. Wtfiv (talk) 15:38, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback RE the block quote. I get your concern regarding the article length and I appreciate you keeping the article focused and accessible. That said, I believe there is value in including a concise excerpt of Jackson's own words, not as a block quote but integrated in the text. His veto message is one of the most rhetorically striking presidential vetoes in U.S. history and including a bit more illustrates the populist tone and moral argument that supported his opposition to the Bank. I'll make a change that paraphrases what was put in but is a trimmed integrated quote. Hopefully this is a workable middle ground. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure even the paraphrased quote adds much to the article. As you can see, the addition of this quote gave rise to a further edit to qualify the quote, addressing the question of whether the populist sentiments given in the speech reflect Jackson's actual motivations. This qualification of Jackson's rhetoric has validity too, as the article suggests elsewhere that Jackson's attitude toward the bank was more complex than populist concern. The addition of both point/counterpoint both enlarges the article and muddies the point. I think just leaving the summary is the best way to go. As a compromise, I added a link to the text of the speech in the Baptist (2016) citation. Readers can access it there if they choose. Wtfiv (talk) 20:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the assassination attempt on Jackson belongs in this paragraph of the lead. The focus of this paragraph emphasizes events that involved Jackson's agency and policies. The assassination attempt is something that incidentally happened to him, but does not address his policy strategy. This is the actions, the paragraph lists:
Reelection, which is due to his previous policies.
Implementation of the Indian Removal Act
Response to the Nullification Crisis
Dismantling second bank of United States
Supporting the Van Buren, Polk, and the Annexation of Texas
Only the election could be seen as something not directly under his control, but that too was a thought out part of his strategy. As the list of assassination attempts makes clear, this was not a unique event for a president. (Though, as noted in the article, it was the first.)
Wtfiv (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's OK to want to organize material into paragraphs, but I would be surprised if there were not a place somewhere in the lead to mention the assassination attempt. A reader who had heard of this might well expect to find it here. Perhaps another paragraph? Bruce leverett (talk) 17:29, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure it need to be in the lead. Being president and the subject of an assassination attempt is not unusual. According to the List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots, nineteen (42%) of the presidents have been subject to assassination attempts. Out of the 12 presidents mentioned the list who, like Jackson, were not physically harmed by an attempt, only one, Herbert Hoover's, is mentioned in the lead. Many of the others are not even mentioned in main space. The amount of detail given to the attempt on Jackson in main space seems appropriate, as it was the first recorded assassination attempt. In my view, this mention is sufficient as this was not a defining aspect of Jackson's presidency. It'd be interesting to hear what others think. Wtfiv (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
