Talk:List of speeches

message: Seriously, 5 speeches by Obama already?  The guy is a great speaker but by putting every speech he makes on the list you're cheapening every other one.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.192.200.200 (talk) 14:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Obama

message: Why aren't there any speeches by famous women on that list? -K  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.30.224.223 (talk) 03:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Women

message: I'd vote 'yes.' In addition to its remarkable efficacy in sabotaging Bork's bid for SCOTUS, it also presaged the modern era of hard-fought confirmation hearings and votes.
There is vandalism aty bottom of page, below external links  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.30.197 (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would Edward Kennedy's 'Bork's America' speech Qualify? 

message: Should speeches without articles be removed? A speech without an article can't be that famous. I can understand for those that, after some time, we can look back and say "Yes, this speech definitely had an important impact", but most speeches without articles don't deserve their place. --A Sunshade Lust 02:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal 

message: Why is that on this list?
:If you don't think any particular speech should be on the list, you can delete it and see if there is an objection. GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Series of Tubes?! 

message: The former chilean president Salvador Allende most famous speech was "Se abrirán de nuevo las grandes alamedas" ("The greats avenues will open again") is one of the most famous speeches in Latinamerican History. Rakela 15:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and added this one, as well as Mbeki's "I am an African".  Also, Hitler was clearly one of the most talented speakers of the last century and there has to be at least one speech that was particularly notable. Mahatma Gandhi is also a contender, though an Indian would probably be better positioned to say which in particular sticks out. - BanyanTree 18:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see that Gandhi already had an item up.  Silly me. - BanyanTree 03:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salvaddor Allende 

message: The Cross of Gold speech (WJ Bryan) hardly seems significant to me. The issue is meaningless to the average person. It takes more than a couple of famous lines to make a great speech. The speech must be about some universal timeless theme of humanity, and the gold standard does not qualify.
:: I would disagree. A speech is famous if it is famous. You can't dismiss a speech given what subject matter is on. If I gave a speech about Mr. Bush's breakfast toast and in 2120 they are still teaching it to high schoolers; I would say that speech was pretty world shaking. Chipmunker (talk) 05:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree w/ Chipminker.  The "Cross of Gold" is more notable now for the degree to which it influenced events at the time, and for the way it influenced the history of the Democratic Party following, than for the specific content.  Although the more general issue it represents, that of money supply and "hard money" policy, certainly remains topical. — Charlie (Colorado) (talk) 14:24, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross of Gold 

message: I feel like this page would be better served if it were split into several pages, with the speeches broken up either by language, culture, nationality, or something else (although I would lean towards culture/nationality).
Simply put, a particular speech is only famous or noteworthy because of--and for--the culture in which the speech was given. For example, speaking to the unsigned comment, Paul Keating's 1993 Redfern Park Speech does sound incredibly important to Australians, but--to be perfectly honest--it means nothing to Americans. In the same way, FDR's "date which will live in infamy" speech or Nixon's "Checkers" speech are probably of little importance to Australians, though both are listed by American historians as among the top ten speeches of the 20th century. (See American Rhetoric.)
The importance of a speech, with a few exceptions, is limited to the culture--and language--in which it was given. Any attempt to lump all of these speeches together into one page is foolhardy and results in a collection of speeches so disjointed as to render it all but useless.
Yocko 09:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually Keating's Redfern Park speech wasn't that important to Australians, or at least not as important as it should be.  Kransky 22:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yocko has a very good point. Let's do it. Sincerely in  Wikidom, GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split the page... 

message: Added the Obama 2004 Keynote Address - do people agree? I am trying not to be partisan, but I think the speech had one of the largest impacts of an individual speech in recent history.
I know it isn't a definitive source, but if you look at AmericanRhetoric.com, which is a site devoted to great speeches, it is one of the top five most requested - along with I Have A Dream, Pearl Harbor, Ballot or the Bullet, and JFK Inaugural. It's recognized as great oratory and came at a time when the Democrats were seen as lacking vision and Obama was virtually unknown.
Just want to make sure, since Obama's in the midst of his primary campaign, this isn't seen as a political addition. I'm for Bill Richardson, for what it's worth, but that's irrelevant to what the great speeches are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by IceJew (talk • contribs) 22:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the Obama speech is worthy of inclusion, at least not yet. The Chavez one I feel belongs because of the amount of international press it received. The Obama speech was probably the best one of 2004 but probably won't stand the test of time as anything but that. --BHC 03:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry but from a worldwide view Obama's speech was insignificant - do we include every single US presidential candidate frontrunner?.  Jesse Jackson's "Keep Hope Alive" speech from 1988 perhaps might be more important.  Kransky 22:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obama Address 

message: There is a lot of speeches in Works of Demosthenes. Including them would help countering recentism. JRSP 19:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demostenes 

message: which of them?--213.97.224.11 (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iowa or new hampshire? 

message: 2 of the greatest charismatic orators of the 20th century...........yet no mention? Why am I not surprised. Look at the German Wiki of each of the aforementioned. Puts our biased pathetic pages to shame. Shape up PC idiots.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nokternus420 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no Mussolini or Hitler? 

message: The date for the sermon on the mount is given as 30AD. Surely this is an approximation. If one accepts the literal truth of the Bible, then we need to place it at least 3 years earlier, probably 5 or 6, since Jesus was born some time during Herod's reign, which ended in 3BC. 60.240.207.146 (talk) 14:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sermon on the mount date? 

message: Have you lefties no shame? 
Just count "Reagan" vs. "Obama" and think which person has had more influence on world history.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.106.21 (talk) 14:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Everybody is entitled to add to or take away from any Wikipedia page. GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  laughable bias as always 

message: Do we really think all those speeches are comparable with the "Cross of Gold", Kennedy's speech in Berlin, or Nixon's resignation? I suspect an NPOV issue here. — Charlie (Colorado) (talk) 14:21, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In time they may be considered famous speeches, but right now, it seems a little too close to the actual event to give us real perspective.  I think we should wait 5 years before considering a speech for inclusion on this list so that we can properly judge its historical impact.--Omaniphil (talk) 14:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I concur, especially when one of them is less than 48 hours old and there is only one other speech (actually an act of a Parliament) more recent that 2006. Has Barrak Obama really made four significant speeches in a period when no other individual has made one? This smacks of boosterism. HNowell (talk) 05:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four Obama Speeches from 2008/2009? 

message: There is a sizable discrepancy between the contents of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Speeches and List of speeches. Some speeches appear in one, but not the other. I can understand speeches not going in the category, if they only have a section in an article. If a speech has its own article, then surely it must be notable enough to automatically go in the list - this is "list of speeches" not "list of famous speeches" after all. 阝工巳几千凹父工氐 (talk) 08:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two standards of notability. 

message: Is Nancy Pelosi's speech on DACA really notable enough to get a seat with "We Choose to go to the Moon" and "I have a dream"? I haven't seen media coverage since it occurred. Ultimograph5 (talk) 23:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pelosi Speech