Talk:Columba Bush

message: Please do not list information not truly relevent to the subject matter.
(Personal attack removed)
*I removed the above-mentioned information from the article and I'd like some information about how she convinced him to convert from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism.--HistoricalPisces 17:52, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Defamation

message: If the arts expert Sara Turner is legendary, why does she not have a page about her? 68.164.80.212 00:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legendary? 

message: Don't see how this is really relevant or necessary by itself. I'm inclined to remove it soon if no-one objects. Grandmasterka 01:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it strange, after all this is a minor offense and as the post above says she is a private citizen. It does not seem to be in proportion with the rest of the article so I have removed it. For the record I am not american and I am not a fan of the Bush clan or republicans. Ulflarsen (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Customs Infraction section 

message: There should be a brief note as to when Mrs. Bush was naturalized an American, as I presume she has been.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.15.102.104 (talk) 16:57, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immigrant status 

message: She is not the topic of this article. Noelle is not a notable person.  It is a BLP violation to only focus on one negative aspect of someone's life.  Please do not violate BLP by mentioning the younger Bush' substance abuse problems.  Please see the discussion concerning Al Gore III.--MaverickLittle (talk) 16:49, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Noelle Bush is not a notable person and as such only brief mention of her as Columba Bush's daughter or Jeb Bush's daughter or any other Bush family member is all that is appropriate.  You can review the permanent discussion concerning Noelle's status here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noelle Bush (second nomination).  If she does something that makes her a notable person then this discussion will be broken open, but right now she it considered not notable.  It is inappropriate to use this particular article about Columba Bush to backdoor all of the substance abuse issues.  Noelle is not a notable person and it is a BLP violation to only mention her in the context of substance abuse.--MaverickLittle (talk) 16:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The mention of daughter Noelle's drug problems as a motivating factor for Columba Bush's work in drug awareness programs has been deleted multiple times.  IT is a relevant fact given the article's focus on her philanthropy.  I don't see how this is a violation of Wikipedia's BLP policy.Arturoramos (talk) 21:52, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this article about Noelle Bush? No.  Is Noelle Bush a notable person? No.  There is absolutely no reason to mention Noelle's substance abuse problems. Zero.  The article is about Columba Bush. Period.  If you want to talk about Columba Bush's volunteer work on substance abuse issues then that is fine because Columba is a notable person.  Why do you believe that we have to mention Noelle's substance abuse problems? Provide a reason.  You have not. Provide a reason.  She is not a notable person.  You are only mentioning her substance abuse problems without mentioning basically anything about her--except the date of birth and where she went to school.  She is not notable person, why do want to talk about her?  Why do want to talk about only negative aspects of her life?  This presentation is not only violates BLP (Noelle Bush) it is irrelevant to the topic the article (Columba Bush).  You can talk about Columba's charity work without talking about the negative aspect of a non-notable person.  You need to deal with several issues here that you have not done.  You need to overcome the decision by Wikipedia that Noelle Bush is not a notable person, worthy of discussion.  You need to explain why talking about Noelle Bush's life is relevant to the life story of Columba Bush since the article is not about Noelle, but about Columba.  You have not provide any rationale behind these issues.  You have merely stated that you do think it violates BLP.  That is not good enough.  You have not provided any substance.  You just stick it in and then say you want it.  You have not provided substantive responses to the BLP issue or the irrelevance issue or the notability issue.  Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero.  You have not explained how Noelle's situation is any different than Al Gore III's situation.  He has way, way, way, more substance abuse issues than Noelle yet there is absolutely no mention of these issues in Al Gore's article, and quite rightly so.  The information is irrelevant to Al Gore's article. Wikipedia has determined that Al Gore III is a non-notable person--just like Wikipedia has determined that Noelle is a non-notable person.  Wikipedia has determined that merely presenting Al Gore III's substance abuse issues, since he is non-notable, is a BLP violation.  You have not responded to the clear precedent of the Al Gore III decisions.  You have provided nothing except for your desire to put in negative information about Noelle--that is not a good reason to put in information, especially information that has been found to be BLP violating, irrelevant about a non-notable person.  This is what needs to be provided by you.--MaverickLittle (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

text: The wikipedia policy regarding "attack pages" states that "negative spinoffs" in which a large amount of negative content is added, are allowed, provided that the information contains adequate citations, etc.Rabbitflyer (talk) 02:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Noelle Bush

message: In the months ahead people will become more interested in Columba Bush - but we should be vigilant. This woman does not meet the criteria for being notable. She is simply the wife of a man who held office nine years ago. She does not seek the spotlight; she has never sought election to anything. Editors may use this page as a way to criticize or embarrass her family, or espouse their own political views in the guise of "journalism." Yet, until January 2017 Columba Bush is still just a private citizen.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purplethree (talk • contribs) 15:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: For example, it seems relevant to mention her children by name, since that comes from a reputable source. But why mention what each child does? One is a public official and has his own Wikipedia page, but the other two are even less notable than their mother. The article should simply mention their names and stop there.Purplethree (talk) 16:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you saying that you believe Columba Bush is not notable then you should attempt to have the article deleted for lack of notability.--ML (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  We should all be careful with this page 

message: What is your rationale or motive behind this edit. Eiffelrhs05 (talk) 14:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all this discussion belongs right here, on the Columba Bush talk page, not on my talk page.--ML (talk) 14:53, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed you reverted me again.  You have decided to make this into an edit war.  Please stop now.--ML (talk) 14:58, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review the Manual of style, which you can find here: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies.  Specifically, please note the following wording from the MOS: "Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability."  This note from the MOS specifically asks you not to do what you are doing, which is referring to her country of birth in the first paragraph.  There are more than enough mentions of her country of birth littered throughout the article. She is not a notable person because of being born in Mexico.  She is a notable person because she is married to a famous person and she is an American.  There is no justification (and you have not provided one) for putting her country of birth in the opening statement.  Also, please reverting without discussion.  You are engaging in an edit war.  You will get blocked after 3RR.--ML (talk) 15:04, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Columba edit question? 

message: A recent edit removed the reference to "Columba de Gallo" in the infobox and left a edit summary that says, "there's no "de" in her last name".  However, the editor, Irn, does not provide a reliable source for his edit; therefore, I reverted.  Now, I would like to have a discussion about her name before we make any changes.  I made the original change to the infobox based upon the article written by Hanna Rosin in the June 2015 issue of The Atlantic magazine, a reliable source from a well-known writer and was recently written.  She refers to Ms. Bush as "de Gallo" in the first paragraph in the following sentence: "His life, he said, can be divided into two parts: “b.c. and a.c.—before Columba and after Columba,” referring to Columba Garnica de Gallo, the woman he fell madly in love with while on a high-school trip to Mexico and then married 41 years ago."  Also, the introduction paragraph to this Wikipedia article refers to her as merely "Gallo".  These two need to be conformed I believe.  I'm looking for input from other editors.ML (talk) 13:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This article and this one both refer to her as "Garnica Gallo". You've also got this article referring to her brother as "Garnica Gallo". Furthermore, since we know her parents' last names, we can figure this one out ourselves: her paternal surname is "Garnica" and her maternal is "Gallo"; put those together and you get "Garnica Gallo". If her mother had the last name "de Gallo", then she would, too. -- Irn (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I read through the Wikipedia article Spanish naming customs and I came to the conclusion that the article "de" could be used by Mrs. Bush if she wanted it used, but it would not conform to Spanish naming customs as they have developed in Spain and in Mexico.  Based upon the fact that "de" can be used, if chosen as a public name, not a legal name, and that have a 80% to 20% split with all of the references then I think it is makes more sense to go with dropping the "de".  "De" is not improper or incorrect, but it is informal and a matter of choice, not a legally accepted option.  So to say that she does not have a "de" in her name is not really a correct statement.  She might have had a "de" in her name if she used the "de" while she was unmarried.  But we just do not know, based upon the reliable sources available.  We do know that she dropped the Spanish naming customs after her marriage to Jeb, not only for her children, but for herself.  She is known as Columba Bush, an Anglo format.  Also, if I read this section here properly: The marital conjunction "de" (of) the "de" is used to move the paternal surname after the maternal surname, i.e., reverse the naming process. It is safer ground to just stick with "Gallo" instead of "de Gallo" because we just don't have definitive support for "de Gallo" even though it is an actual option for her name.--ML (talk) 19:26, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The Atlantic Monthly source (which is used quite a bit in this article) states de Gallo.  We go with what the sources say, not what we think they should have said per Spanish naming conventions.  -- WV ● ✉ ✓  17:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: We have sources that say both. There are over three times as many Google hits for "Columba Garnica Gallo" as there are for "Columba Garnica de Gallo". As I explained above, it's obvious which one is right. (ML misinterpreted the other article. "Gallo de Garnica" would be a possibility for her mother, like "Garnica de Bush" would be a possibility for her.) Why would we go with the other one just because one particular source uses it? -- Irn (talk) 10:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: @Irn: I agree.  --  ML (talk) 15:46, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: de Gallo versus Gallo

message: Never have liked the "pronounced coh-LOOM-bah" pronunciation help after her name.  The IPA is /kəˈlʌm bə/ and should replace the other.  When the article is unlocked, that is.  -- WV ● ✉ ✓  03:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  First name IPA suggestion 

message: She was naturalized as a US citizen in 1979, but she was a Mexican citizen from 1953 to 1979. Did she renounce her Mexican citizenship, or is she a dual citizen?Zigzig20s (talk) 20:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is she a dual citizen? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Columba Bush. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071007142035/http://airwolf.lmtonline.com/news/archive/021401/pagea8.pdf to http://airwolf.lmtonline.com/news/archive/021401/pagea8.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified