Q1: Why does Wikipedia say that Kamala Harris is African American/Asian American/South Asian American?
A1: Wikipedia content is based on reliable sources (see Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Reliable sources). Many reliable sources, over a long period, refer to Harris as African American and Asian American, so Wikipedia reflects that in this article. Moreover, Harris's Senate and campaign websites state that she is African American and Asian American.
Social media posts have inaccurately suggested that Harris cannot be African American because she has an Indian mother and Jamaican father. As PolitiFact notes, (see A look at Kamala Harris' multi-ethnic background and racial identity in the US, PolitiFact (August 14, 2020)), "this is a poor understanding of history, and... the implication that Jamaicans aren't African or connected to Africa is wrong on its face." While not all Jamaican-Americans identify as "African American," Harris and many others do.
When Wikipedia describes someone as the "first" to do something, we default to the larger category. Therefore, while Harris is the first Tamil-American, Indian-American, or South Asian-American to be Vice President of the US, we describe her, as reliable sources do, as the first Asian American to be Vice President of the US.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
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 WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Black Lives Matter, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Black Lives Matter 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.Black Lives MatterWikipedia:WikiProject Black Lives MatterTemplate:WikiProject Black Lives MatterBlack Lives Matter
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montreal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montreal 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.MontrealWikipedia:WikiProject MontrealTemplate:WikiProject MontrealMontreal
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, 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 Presidents of the United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Presidents of the United States 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.Presidents of the United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject Presidents of the United StatesTemplate:WikiProject Presidents of the United StatesPresidents of the United States
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 University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics 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.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California
This article was created or improved during the following events hosted by the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message
Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!
Other talk page banners
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 has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2024.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report27 times. The weeks in which this happened:
@Slatersteven we had a vile vandal that filled some articles with the n word yesterday. Some users have complained that it still comes up in previews. I don't know what the solution is as the edits were rev/del. Knitsey (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that, it's the preview when you hover over the article. I can't tell if that is still the case as I'm on mobile. Knitsey (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What you saw was vandalism, plain and simple. Another editor reverted the change now, so the page no longer contains such unencyclopedic language, and oversight has removed the revision from public view as plain disruption. As this high-visibility page has been downgraded from extended-confirmed protection (meaning only accounts over one month old with 500 edits could change content on it), autoconfirmed accounts (those with over 10 edits and an account four days or older) have been vandalizing it more often, so it may need to be re-protected if disruption continues. Departure– (talk) 15:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In this case the autoconfirmed account did the usual circumvention by doing 10 quick edits in their sandbox to gain autoconfirmed status, and then immediately proceeded to vandalize this article. I've always felt there should be some sort of heuristic to withhold autoconfirmed status when someone is clearly trying to game the system. Like for example, 10 edits in four days, either spread out over those four days, or actual content edits rather than 2-character additions and deletions repeated. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:38, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the last sentence of the second paragraph of the "Political Positions" section, one article is cited that calls Kamala Harris a populist. Yes, that's true that the article says that, but I think we are giving undue weight to a minority opinion. Kamala Harris is not widely regarded as a populist, and I don't think I ever remember her saying anything about "elites" or anything like that, which is essential to being a populist. On the pages for populism and in the United States, Harris isn't even mentioned once, while Sanders and Trump (opponents of her runs in 2020 and 2024) are referenced frequently. I think we should remove everything in that sentence after the comma.
Removing this information seems too extreme to me. A smaller step in your direction is to name the sources that call her politics "populist". The relevant guideline can be seen at WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. We can say that a trio of Politico writers including White House journalist Myah Ward, and a trio of WaPo journalists including White House reporter Yasmeen Abutaleb have called Harris's politics populist. Binksternet (talk) 02:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When will you correct the article to call her the first Jamaican-American or even half-black female vice President?
Kamala Harris is not black in the American sense of the word. She is of Jamaican origin and half. Her father is Jamaican while her mother is Indian. Calling her African American is a humongous slap in the face at least to me as someone who is half African American. It is also a bit of a misnomer to call her Asian American since we do not technically refer to Indians as being Asian American (they are from Asia but so are Middle Easterners and Russians and we don't call those people Asian Americans). This misnomer is extremely harmful to many groups both who feel improperly mentioned and rudely excluded, like biracial groups, Indian groups, Jamaican groups, and African-American groups. To be considered African-American, your lineage and family generally must have experienced both slavery and segregation on US soil (or what later became US soil), unless you descend from free blacks, which is rare. Likewise calling her Asian-American might undercut the experiences of Indian American who experience a type of racism and xenophobia similar to that of Middle Easterners, and which typical Asian-Americans do not. Furthermore, the biracial erasure is very clear and powerful and should be mentioned as primary, rather than propping her up incorrectly as an African-American. The text would be better suited to be written as "Harris is the first female vice-President, the first biracial vice President, the first vice-President of Indian heritage, and the first vice-President of black Jamaican heritage." This would respect all groups she belongs to and respect groups she does not belong to but is being lumped into for political reasons. Obviously, Mrs. Harris knows this herself but since the game is played so sneakily she does not ask for that information to be updated or altered. 38.27.115.10 (talk) 12:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Previously, some editors opposed including a presidential debate mentioned in the lead primarily based on past precedents, such as prior presidential candidates Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney not having debates mentioned in their leads.
In case of Harris, we have WP:RS sources that mention that this presidential debate was a notable aspect of her career.
"this was clearly Harris’ best debate performance of her career, without any clear missteps".
Also, its sufficiently detailed in the article body, and therefore should be summarized briefly per WP:LEAD
On September 10, 2024, ABC News hosted the presidential debate between Harris and Trump in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In the debate, Trump tried to portray Harris as a "radical liberal". Harris's sharpest criticisms of Trump came on abortion rights, where she said she would restore women's rights to what they were under Roe. Harris was declared the winner of the debate by several political analysts, including columnists from CNN, Politico, The New York Times, and USA Today. Some analysts noted that for Harris, this was the "best debate performance of her career," in which she forcefully highlighted her strengths and rattled former president Trump. After the debate, Harris got a prominent celebrity endorsement from Taylor Swift. However, the polls remained close and showed Harris had a hard time conveying that she could represent a "change".
Therefore, I think it should be included in the lead per WP:RS notable aspect argument.
best debate performance of their career would imply notable performance.
We need to follow the WP:RS sources
For additional English meaning for Wiki editors whoose first language is not English. See Google Search "Best performance of the career" in English on Google.com
Best performance of the career in English refers to the highest or most outstanding achievement or accomplishment someone has made throughout their professional life, often considered their peak or most memorable success.
Because per WP:RS sources, the this was the best debate of her career, making it one of the most notable events of Harris's life and political career. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is sufficiently detailed in the article body, and therefore should be summarized briefly per WP:LEAD
On September 10, 2024, ABC News hosted the presidential debate between Harris and Trump in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In the debate, Trump tried to portray Harris as a "radical liberal". Harris's sharpest criticisms of Trump came on abortion rights, where she said she would restore women's rights to what they were under Roe. Harris was declared the winner of the debate by several political analysts, including columnists from CNN, Politico, The New York Times, and USA Today. Some analysts noted that for Harris, this was the "best debate performance of her career," in which she forcefully highlighted her strengths and rattled former president Trump. After the debate, Harris got a prominent celebrity endorsement from Taylor Swift. However, the polls remained close and showed Harris had a hard time conveying that she could represent a "change". Thanks. RogerYg (talk)
I am suggesting adding one line on debate in the last paragraph of the Lead that deals with her 2024 campaign. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 09:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In my humble view, there are often notable aspects in lead that may have only 1 paragraph in the body. Hence, our reasoning should be based on whether sufficient WP:RS sources mention the event as notable aspect to include it in the lead. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 09:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
_(3x4_close_cropped).jpg)
.svg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
