Talk:United States presidential vacations

Misleading

The primary substantive content of this article, the descriptive introduction, is not supported by the cited reference and is misleading. The Time article is not being critical of the President or his vacation time and I think the word "contentious" is misleading. Additionally, the lead intro needs work and not to be so narrow. This article can have potential, but in its current state I would imagine this would at best lead to a redirect.Barkeep ^{Chat | $} 20:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

It seems rather partisan by mentioning Obama and ignoring other recent presidential vacations that have been the subject of criticism.[1][2][3] 69.181.249.92 (talk) 22:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

This seems to be a great article on this topic. http://politic365.com/2012/05/08/obamas-vacations-of-any-president-bush-racked-up-the-most/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.93.47.38 (talk) 19:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

There's an issue with the 97 days of vacation mentioned for President Trump: The cite actually says "all or part" of 98 days were taken as vacation. This does not mean President Trump had taken a full 97 days of vacation by November 2017, the date of the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.168.151.121 (talk) 13:36, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Current state of article useless. Looking for cumulative lengths

Actually, I think it might make more sense to just recommend that the article be deleted. I do think it is an important topic and deserves honest NPV coverage, precisely because the topic is so frequently used in non-neutral partisan attacks. However, the current state of the article contains no useful or even potentially interesting information that I could detect. What I was looking for was total vacation days taken away from the White House. Seems like some people want to figure out the costs, but I don't see any way to normalize the costs in a meaningful manner. Depends on where the president's home is and where he takes his vacations, as well as the changing costs of the changing kinds of security precautions that are taken over the years. Even without doing the research I'm sure it's safe to predict that they greatly increased the security budget after JFK was shot. So how do I vote for deletion of the article? Shanen (talk) 11:30, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

• I started a table with the best information I could find. It's going to take a crowd of people to work out a comprehensive list. 19th century Presidents may be unobtainable (except for William Henry Harrison who obviously died before he could either work or vacation).scooteristi (talk) 20:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

How to Add

While with Trump there are reporters keeping up a running total that seemingly needs to be updated every Monday morning and with Obama there were reporters who did the same, with the other Presidents, the limited information that has been reported seems to have been gleaned from calling each President's library. So if someone wants to really flesh this article out, they'll need to do some original reporting and make calls to the various Presidential libraries and get the answers.scooteristi (talk) 04:19, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Misleading

Biden citation equates working from locations outside of the White House with vacation time. The article states that this was time spent working remotely while the Wikipedia page uses that information - and nothing more - to support its vacation total. 2605:59C8:644B:510:28A7:2B5A:7453:28E0 (talk) 09:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

NY Post is not a news source

The NY Post is a known tabloid with an agenda. Using it as a source for Bidens vacation is misleading. In particular it’s taken directly from RNC propaganda and has no cited sources. 99.129.136.230 (talk) 14:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)