Talk:List of United States presidential firsts/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Filmore Bathtub

I've seen this in print on numerous occasions, but I've also heard some reporter completely made up the story. Thoughts? Czolgolz (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

It was a joke by H. L. Mencken. See Bathtub hoax. --71.105.96.33 (talk) 07:13, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

First to ride in automobile

While Teddy Roosevelt is often credited with this, William McKinley was taken to the hospital in an electric ambulance after being shot in 1901, making him the first.Czolgolz (talk) 22:11, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Andrew Johnson

It says that Andrew Johnson was the "First President to not be a lawyer or a general." In fact, Johnson was a general. --71.105.96.33 (talk) 07:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I've removed that, it was dubious. Czolgolz (talk) 11:26, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan

The Ronald Reagan section claimed that he was "First President to win a second term by more electoral votes than his first term." That's not true. Several other Presidents did just that including George Washington! The following numbers are taken from United States presidential election#Electoral college results

  • Washington 1789: 69 electoral votes
  • Washington 1792: 132 electoral votes
  • Jefferson 1800: 73 electoral votes
  • Jefferson 1804: 162 electoral votes
  • Madison 1808: 122 electoral votes
  • Madison 1812: 128 electoral votes
  • Monroe 1816: 183 electoral votes
  • Monroe 1820: 228 or 231 electoral votes
  • Jackson 1828: 178 electoral votes
  • Jackson 1832: 219 electoral votes
  • Lincoln 1860: 180 electoral votes
  • Lincoln 1864: 212 electoral votes
  • Grant 1868: 214 electoral votes
  • Grant 1872: 286 electoral votes
  • Cleveland 1884: 219 electoral votes
  • Cleveland 1892: 277 electoral votes
  • McKinley 1896: 271 electoral votes
  • McKinley 1900: 292 electoral votes
  • FD Roosevelt 1932: 472 electoral votes
  • FD Roosevelt 1936: 523 electoral votes
  • Eisenhower 1952: 442 electoral votes
  • Eisenhower 1956: 457 electoral votes
  • Nixon 1968: 301 electoral votes
  • Nixon 1972: 520 electoral votes
  • Reagan 1980: 489 electoral votes
  • Reagan 1984: 525 electoral votes
  • Clinton 1992: 370 electoral votes
  • Clinton 1996: 379 electoral votes
  • GW Bush 2000: 271 electoral votes
  • GW Bush 2004: 286 electoral votes

Mtminchi08 (talk) 01:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

John Adams

I removed several 'first president to not...' facts. Since he was the second president, anything he did differently from George Washington would be a first. Heck, he was the first president not to wear dentures and have a wife named Martha. Czolgolz (talk) 13:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't have removed "not in the military" tho, because there are a lot of lists that track presidents that were in the military and presidents that weren't. pbp 13:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Feel free to restore it if you like. Czolgolz (talk) 13:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump

What is Donald Trump's entry on this list going to look like? We might have to remove some "and to date, only" entries ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 17:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, first to be twice divorced (and Reagan is now not the only divorcee). Czolgolz (talk) 18:35, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
First billionaire president, and the first to hold the office without any government or military experience.  AJFU  19:07, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Zachary Taylor also had never been elected to any office.∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 21:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
It was political or military experience. Taylor was a professional soldier. Czolgolz (talk) 21:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
A section has already been added for him, even though he is not yet elected :/ ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 21:35, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Parents, grandchildren, etc

There's been a spate of additions like 'first to have a parent alive after they left office' or 'first to live to see a grandchild.' A lot. Where do we draw the line? Czolgolz (talk) 21:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree. Just because this is a List doesn't mean that it doesn't deserve the same respect & attention to Wikipedia's core principles that articles get. Shearonink (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Rm a lot of unsourced nonsense

First president to be older than three of his predecessors? Really? Czolgolz (talk) 18:31, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

References?....

This list's content is presently almost 50% unsourced (out of approximately 475 bullet points, approximately 272 are unsourced). Per Wikipedia guidelines, every asserted statement should be clearly verifiable. In the interest of improving this List and improving Wikipedia, editors should only add statements that are reliably-sourced. Shearonink (talk) 15:45, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Reminder to anyone editing this article

All Wikipedia policies and guidelines apply. In addition WP:LISTVERIFY, as well as WP:PROVEIT apply to every List in Wikipedia. Please do not add unsourced information to this List. Let's all work together to improve it. Thanks. Shearonink (talk) 23:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Wording is weird.

To me, the wording is super weird. Most of it just sounds odd when it is said; just doesn't flow right. I don't know if it's just me, but I'd want to reword the sentences, if that's okay. Ccalvyn97 (talk) 05:06, 5 December 2016 (UTC)


Usage of phrase "and, to date, only"

This phrase seems extraneous to me since the article is only a List of US Presidential Firsts. I don't see any disclaimers about the phraseology "and, to date, only". Shearonink (talk) 21:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't see why you're fighting it in the manner you're doing. It's not POV-pushing to say Nixon was the only President to resign. pbp 21:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Just wondering about the reason. I already said it seemed extraneous to me and am asking why it is necessary to have this phrase in the List over 20 times. Shearonink (talk) 22:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
...Because there's not really a point in forking List of United States Presidential onlies from this article? What's wrong with added information? pbp 23:05, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I find the phrase jarring, the rest of the List seems very factual and am asking if it's necessary. Does this added information appears in the cited sources? Shearonink (talk) 23:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I believe it appears in at least some of them. Would have to go back and check. pbp 23:38, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Oh well, I still find the phrase itself jarring. Besides, many of the "firsts" listed here could be editorially described as "and, to date, only", ranging from Andrew Jackson's "born in a log cabin" to John Tyler's "to be widowed while in office" to Barack Obama's "address both houses of the British Parliament"... Shearonink (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Aaaaaaaaand now the article is up to 25 different uses of the phrase "(and, to date, only)". This article is supposed to be about US Presidential firsts. If editors are adding this phrase on their own or if this information does not appear in the cited sources, doesn't the assertion itself verge on original research? How does the reader know if someone was the only President to have done [something]? Looks like it's because this Wikipedia article says so. Shearonink (talk) 17:32, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm still not seeing the big whoop. All presidential onlies are also presidential firsts, so it's not a stretch to have them in this article. If there are particular facts that you dispute, you can tag them. pbp 19:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I find the repeated use of the phrase "(and, to date, only)" to be tendentious. And why should I have to dispute or prove anything? I'm not adding the phrase to the article, the editors who are adding the phrase to the article should be the ones to verify & source the statements the phrase purports to support. And, as to why, like, maybe I don't, like, perhaps, like the phrase, well, like, all I can say, like, is that when a phrase, is, like, repeated over and over again it, like, kind of loses its punch and, like, becomes annoying. Shearonink (talk) 04:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
As there have been only 43 individuals to hold the office, I find the phrase annoying. Either it's going to be something fairly unique, like being born in Kentucky, or something all the successors do, like appearing on TV. I say delete the phrase. Bkatcher (talk) 22:18, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I've removed some 'to date only' tags on things not likely to be repeated (like killing someone in a duel) or mundane things, like state of birth. Bkatcher (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I've removed all 'to date only' tags as irrelevant if you want a presidential onlys list make one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmYisroelChai (talk • contribs) 14:47, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln

Shouldn't we note that he was the first president to be elected as a member of one party, then re-elected a member of another? He was first elected as a Republican, then as a member of the National Union party. The difference between the two is more symbolic than anything else, but I still feel like it's notable enough to mention. I thought I'd ask before adding it though. Nulla Lex Ink. (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

"and, to date, only"?...

Every single Presidential first listed here could qualify for being "and, to date, only". Every first is the only occurrence of that action so far in history, this phrase makes little sense to me and I think that all of its occurrences should be removed from this List... Conversely, the usage of "First" without the phrase could be said to carry the implication that there was a "second" President to achieve this action or status. I still think the phrase should be deleted but thought that this should be discussed here on the article's talkpage before I do anything towards this first. Shearonink (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

You are mistaken. First means first, which at the time would be only, but at the current point in history is no longer only. But still the first. You follow me? Otherwise why would we have "First President of the United States" listed, that'd just be silly. Hence the use of the phrase "and, to date, only" to distinguish such entries.--Pokelova (talk) 18:54, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
I can see your point re the difference between First/Only, but is its use really necessary in this List? Just take a look at where it's used and where it's not....many of the present entries do not need "and, to date, only" as an adjective, the use of the phrase adds nothing new or unique to the article. This content is all not really First so much as Only, which maybe could be a subset of this First-List. Shearonink (talk) 19:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of United States Presidential firsts. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Every single asserted "first" on this List

...should have a reference. This is not a user sandbox, or an AfC. I am removing every statement that is unsourced, there have been maintenance templates on this article for at least 5 months and unsourced information is still on this List without a reliable source and is still being added without a source. When editors have a source then according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines that information can be added to the List along with the appropriate and reliable reference. Shearonink (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I made the decision to leave statements in the List that at least had links to Wikipedia articles, since that condition could be construed as being somewhat sourced. I have removed all completely unsourced statements. This List should not be a receptacle for unsourced statements about past or present US Presidents, about dead or living individuals. If something is true about one of these individuals, then find and provide a source to verify that statement. Shearonink (talk) 20:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
However, please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a source. "Somewhat sourced" is fuzzy territory.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 16:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Keep Page Uniform

if the line doesn't start with First President change it or remove itAmYisroelChai (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

don't write more than one first on one line just write it on another line for second itemAmYisroelChai (talk) 15:52, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Is this a recommendation?--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 16:34, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
yes but i will try change it so its uniformAmYisroelChai (talk) 17:17, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Reference quality

I'm a little concerned about the quality of Richard Lederer's. Presidential Trivia. We cite it in J. Adams, Jefferson, J.Q. Adams, and B. Harrison; as I'm typing, it's ref number 11. The format of the book reminds me of those one buys at museum gift shops. I'm not saying that the information is false, only that it's designed to amuse rather than inform. That leaves the level of scholarship a little low. I don't think we need to remove this reference or any others like it but we can use Template:Better source to flag places where we recognize there's work to be done.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 22:04, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

What does first mean?

Does first mean the president elected earlier even if he did it after a later president as we have JFK being the first president born in 20th century when LBJ was actually the first as he was born before JFK he just served after him because than we would have to change any milestone reached by a later president if an earlier one surpasses that milestone after him as we have Bush senior being the first to be married 70 years but now that Carter has been married 70 years does that change? AmYisroelChai (talk) 16:28, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I think the consensus is that the first person to achieve the milestone AND become president. Bkatcher (talk) 16:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of Vice Presidents of the United States which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Potential thing to add for Trump

I've heard it said that Trump is the first president with a Jewish member of the First Family (Ivanka). Is this true? If someone can verify it, it seems worth adding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.37.244.43 (talk) 13:06, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Sourced content please

The Wikipedia policy of Verifiability states that

Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations. and verifiability means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source.

Also, the Manual of Style guideline WP:SOURCELIST states that

Lists ... are encyclopedic content just as paragraph-only articles or sections are. Therefore, all individual items on the list must follow Wikipedia's content policies: the core content policies of Verifiability (through good sources in the item's one or more references), No original research, and Neutral point of view, plus the other content policies as well.

So. This policy and this guideline mean that information can't just be added to this List because we like it or because we somehow know that it's true - it has to be from a reliable, published source and that source must be included. This List has been tagged with the additional citations needed since July and rightfully so - it has many unsourced claims, statements, assertions, and all these unsourced claims, per Wikipedia policy & guidelines, should be removed. If an editor finds a reliable source for a statement that has been removed then have at it, put the statement back in the article and include the source. Shearonink (talk) 02:59, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Harvard cite or CITEREF issues

Right now there are 4 Harvard cite problems - 2 Harv error's and 2 Harv warning's. (I can see these issues because I have the 'HarvErrors' script installed on one of my common pages.)
If you don't understand how to construct Harvard refs - that's fine, lots of people have trouble with them - just ask for help on this talk page, describe the issues on your talk page and use {{helpme}} to notify some helpers, or go to Template:Harvard citation for instructions on how to construct and use the Harvard style of references. I'm going to fix those 4 broken refs now. Cheers. Shearonink (talk) 20:20, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

70 years of age

Trump is the first president to be 70 prior to his inauguration and also the first to reach 70 prior to his election, they are 2 distinct firsts, as it is possible to be 70 before inauguration without being 70 on election day, so we have to put in both to show no president was 70 prior to inauguration and no president was 70 prior to election, so yes once trump was 70 at election he is 70 at inauguration but that wouldn't mean he was for sure the first one to be so, so we need to put in both 148.77.10.25 (talk) 15:34, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

But by being the first to be 70 upon election, it's understood that he was also 70+ on inauguration. This would only be an issue of a previous president had achieved one but not the other. Bkatcher (talk) 15:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
yes but since he is the first for both the page should reflect that 148.77.10.25 (talk) 16:00, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
John Adams was the first to be 60 upon election and entering office, but entering office is the only thing mentioned. Bkatcher (talk) 16:19, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

If that is all true, then maybe we should have a category for each age "First President to reach the age of 71/72/73 during his first term of office", First President to be elected after an African-American President...etc etc etc etc. At some point you have to stop before it gets stupid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.196.161.203 (talk) 10:08, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Tightening inclusion criteria

This list is a bit indiscriminate. The inclusion criteria need to be stricter and well stated. Suggestions? My thoughts are that only entries that have received significant coverage ought be on the list. Thus, 2-3 sources for every claim ought be expected. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:03, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Two sources would be ample. That's what done at the list of unusual deaths. That has survived numerous attempts to delete it and has gotten favourable attention in the press. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
  • The issue is not a lack of verifiability or these facts being so obscure that sources cannot be found, it's that they're often arbitrary, random, and often irrelevant. Most of these are just fun facts and trivia that have little bearing to being the first president to do so, or are generic statements of history. First president to be assassinated and die on the same date – oh how precise. First president of all 50 states (Alaska and Hawaii were admitted during his presidency) – not about him. First president to have had a vice president resign (John C. Calhoun in 1832) – also not about him. First president to have served as Supreme Allied Commander Europe – really? Of course he was the first, the position didn't exist earlier, and it's no surprise no one else was that! Just read Dwight D. Eisenhower. First president to serve as president of Princeton University – unnecessarily specific and another reason why this could be deleted. We should just move this page to US Presidents trivia!!! because that's what it is, not a coherent collection of related information. I'd be much more interested in that: it's a much more useful fact to know that both Van Buren and Clinton had served as state attorneys general than that MVB was the first. More useful that both Lincoln and Taylor were from Kentucky, not that Taylor was the first. And we already have it! List of presidents of the United States by home state and List of presidents of the United States by other offices held, etc... Please trim all you want, because without any inclusion criteria people have added also all the pointless randomness they want...I got it started years ago. Reywas92Talk 05:47, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Add bullet to Franklin Pierce:

First 19th Century President to be born in the 19th Century - November 23, 1804. His predecessor, President Millard Fillmore was born in 1800, the last year of the 18th Century.

2601:14B:C200:D8F0:7DB1:B1B2:70B8:D5E5 (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Barry Gaffney Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). Google search: list of presidents birthdays in order.

Add bullet to Franklin Pierce

First 19th Century President to be born in the 19th Century - November 23, 1804. His predecessor, President Millard Fillmore was born in 1800, the last year of the 18th Century.

Finbarr57 (talk) 14:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Barry Gaffney Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). Google search: list of presidents birthdays in order.

The Washington problem

Washington, being the first president, was technically the first to do just about everything a president could do. How do we deal with this Washington problem? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:04, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

  • It's not much of a problem because the list only has about 24 entries for Washington and that's less than Adams and Eisenhower. So, the issue is not unbalancing the list in an undue way. If any first is challenged as odd or inappropriate then the general solution is to demonstrate that there's independent coverage in some source which shows that it is considered remarkable or significant. In other words, to avoid OR, we just follow the sources. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:17, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
  • a) Andrew's correct that there's not bloat in the Washington section, and b) For most Washington things, we should just say that there should be a commensurate first for another President (i.e. Washington first Virginia, Adams first Bay Stater). pbp 00:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
That doesn't make sense. It is not an issue of bloat. It's a problem with logic. Washington was the first president to be whatever he was and to do whatever he did. Washington was the first president to be male; the first president to have nostrils; the first president to take a crap. So he was the first president to be born in Virginia, but that's true by definition. Sources don't help. Anyone who reads Washington's biography could say, "Gee whiz, he was the first president to do that". It's true by definition. Citations prove this fact is true, but it still remains meaningless to say it. With other presidents we are saying that no other president was this or did that. We are not saying that with Washington, so it is a nonsensical claim.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. If he is the only president to be or do something, that might be interesting. Or if his doing something set a standard or precedent, such as his deciding not to run for a third term.--Khajidha (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Non-Incumbent vice-president elected president.

Since former Vice-President Joe Biden has won the 2020 Presidential election, should we make a distinction between Richard Nixon and Joe Biden where Nixon was the first Republican non-incumbent Vice-President to be elected president with Joe Biden as the first Democrat non-incumbent Vice-President to be elected president? Ellis1986 (talk) 03:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Nope. This list isn't divided by party. If we did that we'd double, or in some cases triple or quadruple, the entries. One is enough. Bkatcher (talk) 01:36, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Removal of trivia

I've removed a lot of trivia. First president to throw up on a foreign leader, first president to recognize a Delta forces working dog, first president to be analyzed with a metal detector, etc. Also, a lot of 'first president to run against a president who X.' This isn't about their opponents. Bkatcher (talk) 01:30, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Greetings! I apologize, I made most of those entries removed and didn’t realize there was a major distinction with trivia. Under what basis does something constitute as trivia and something as an achievement? I removed the entry on Washington having a submarine named after him due to that falling into what I imagine is a similar basis, but I want to ensure I don’t make a similar mistake in the future. Thank you for your understanding! Maestrolive (talk) 01:52, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Greetings as well! You raise a legitimate point, there is no clear definition as to what constitutes trivia and what constitutes a first, and I invite others to weigh in here. Every president has probably done thousands of things that his predecessors didn't, and this article could easily be the longest in Wikipedia if we let it. Here's my suggestions for inclusion, and again, I invite input:
  • First to do something every one of his successors did: First to speak on the telephone (not first to speak on a Spartphone 6)
  • Something highly unusual and notable: first to fight a duel (not first to put ketchup on his pancakes)
  • First to do something politically significant: first to serve in the senate (not first to be president of his high school debate club)
I also feel we should avoid things relating to people they are associated with: first to defeat an opponent who did X, first to have a wife who was X, first to have a VP who was X, etc.
This article has become extremely bloated in the past. Incidentally, thank you for adding a great number of interesting and legitimate entries. I was surprised no one had added Bush's Distinguished Flying Cross before. Bkatcher (talk) 06:42, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much, this helps and clears up a lot! I’ve had some fun going through some presidential research lately and have been adding anything I felt was worthy of being on the list (the Bush Flying Cross and Obama being the first to enter the Arctic Circle for example), and might very well have gotten carried away. Ill be sure to keep all these in mind.

Additionally, would it be helpful if we perhaps divided each President’s tab to have sections for “prior to assuming office”, “serving in office”, and “post office”. This should clear up plenty of space and help organize the material better.

Thanks again for the help! Maestrolive (talk) 09:19, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

We should limit it to things done while in office and to significant facts that are not time related. By which I mean things like "first Catholic", "first African-American". Things they are at election, not things they did before election. --Khajidha (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Herbert fact

I recently added a new fact for President Hoover (First president without combat experience who wasn't elected to any political office before becoming President), which was reverted for being seen as being too vague. What I meant by this was: Herbert Hoover was the first president to not fight in combat or be enlisted in the U.S Armed Forces to be elected to the Presidency without ever having been elected to any other political office. Let me know if this too vague, complicated, or trivia-y. Masterofpresidents (talk) 18:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Masterofpresidents, Although I was not the one to revert your edit, let me interject my opinion. Your contribution wasn't really a fact, being double-barreled. the facts that made up your statement weren't true in themselves, rather they required each other as a qualifier to be true. This is rather complicated and is discouraged when listing facts. if you can think of a way to word it so that the fact is not double-barreled, I would be all for listing it but I can't think of any way to do that. ProfessionalGecko (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
ProfessionalGecko, I see what you mean. Hoover wasn't the first President without military experience, and he wasn't the first President to not hold elected office before his Presidency. I also don't think there's a way to combine these into one fact. Perhaps by using the word "public service" in some capacity? I honestly wouldn't be bothered if we couldn't find a way to keep it. Thanks for your help! Masterofpresidents (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I think that's the problem, Hoover did work in government before he became president being the secretary of commerce and the head of the US Food Administration. Donald Trump is the first president not to have worked in government in any form before becoming president (which is mentioned in his section).ProfessionalGecko (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

'Born in' vs 'From'

People keep adding that Biden is the first president 'from Delaware,' though he was born in Pennsylvania. We've not done that with other presidents, such as Eisenhower, whose birthstate was different than the state they ran from. Any thoughts? Bkatcher (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Some of these are getting ridiculous

Just because Biden was the first to do it, doesn't make it notable. First president to vacation regularly at Rehoboth Beach, Delaware? Really? Bkatcher (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Trump being the first president to "approve of gay marriage"

I would argue that saying that you approve of gay marriage, that saying anything, should not be the only criteria to be put in this list. Yes, Trump said he doesn't mind how the (at that time) current laws were, but that is **not** approval, it is indifference at best. And how he has acted proofs the inverse. The following sources, in my opinion, don't prove this:

  1. Kellyanne Conway: Trump first president to take office 'approving of gay marriage' - This is a statement by a person who hardly can be considered a neutral point of view. Also, Wikipedia doesn't consier the Washington Examiner a reliable claim
  2. Trump’s Celebration of L.G.B.T. Rights Is Met With Criticism - The irony of this source is strong, it argues the exact opposite of what is awarded as a first to Trump here.
  3. GOP President-Elect Donald Trump Says Same-Sex Marriage Is 'Settled' Law - This is Trumps opinion (let me get back to this in a minute), but it doesn't say he approves. It says he doesn't care to change the law. Again; this is indifference, not approval.
  4. Everything President Trump Has Said About The LGBTQ Community, Including Fighting For Them | TIME - A video of things Trump has said (and typed). But; plenty of these statements are either false or unverifiable. E.g.: it contains one of his many "a guy"-stories.
  5. Gay Republicans Explain Why They Are Proudly Supporting Donald Trump - Yet again an unreliable opinion. This isn't an article that claims Trump is good for the gay community or LGBT as a whole, this is an article reporting on someone who said he believes he is.
  6. Trump Is First GOP Nominee to Mention LGBTQ Citizens in Acceptance Speech - Okay sure, but how is this a source for this statement? Also, this was right after a terrorist attack, not mentioning it would have resulted in public outcry.

The point is; none of these sources are both reliable or even sources for this claim. And even if they are, it is just people making claims. Can a person just walk up on a stage say "I approve everything" and we have to fill up this list with everything nobody else approved of before. How do we know that no previous president approved of something if they didn't mention that they did not approve of it? Here is a list of the things he *did* do for the LGBT community and the G-part more specifically:

  1. On day 1 of his administration, (almost) all mentions of LGBT were removed from the White House website.
  2. A few days later an apology for discrimination was removed by the state department.
  3. Withdrew a notice for guidelines related to a homlessness prevention program targetting LGBTQ.
  4. Gorshuc and Kavanaugh both have a history opposing civil rights, including LGBTQ.
  5. He attempted (not sure if he actually succeeded here) to remove sexual orientation and gender identity questions from the 2020 census.
  6. Stopped enforcing non-discrimination protections which are protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
  7. ...then went to court (but lost) over the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
  8. Trump opposed the Equality Act, yet another act that was designed to protect discrimination to the LGBTQ community.
  9. Submitted briefs to the SCOTUS supporting discrimination against LGBTQ.
  10. Issued rules to allow federal contractors to discriminate against LGBTQ on basis of relgion.
  11. Had people thrown out of the military for heving HIV.
  12. Created a hostile environment for federal employees.
  13. Tried to remove LGBTQ protections from the Affordable Care Act (and of course advocated to eliminate the program entirely without any replacement).
  14. HHS created a new office with the sole purpose to defend medical professionals who refused to care for LGBTQ patients.
  15. His Department of Education refused to work with civil complaints from the LGBTQ community.
  16. Allowed discrimination against LGBTQ within schools, including those that receive tax-payer funds.

I could keep going... The point is: saying you approve and actually approving are 2 entirely different things. In short:

  1. The sources are inadequate in proving the statement (unreliable opinions, not proof of the statement, or just not related to the statement at all). I'd argue that "first to approve" anything is a ridiculous thing to prove either way. How do we know that someone who didn't make a statement on this did not approve?
  2. It is especially hard to proof when actions don't match, and his actions are consistenlty in conflict with the statement.
  3. I'd like to point out that the Politico link referenced above claims that Obama's administration took "immediately took steps to advance LGBT health issues". This yet again contradicts the statement for Trump.
  4. Adding the "take office" specification itself is also yet again a needlessly specific to get another "first" out of this, and again; the Obama administration started off protecting LGBT rights from the start, something we can't say about the Trump admin.
  5. Trumps claim that he believes something to be "settled law" doesn't mean he approves of it, again, it is indifference at best.

--YannickFran (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

This seems to have been (rightfully) removed. Just remember, Wikipedia is not a soapbox and you could have made your point with fewer paragraphs. Bkatcher (talk) 05:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

George Washington

He was the first President in general, and so he was the first President with all the qualities he had. So any of his firsts are relatively trivial. I suggest we remove him from this list because his firsts are trivial. Any suggestions?? Georgia guy (talk) 02:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

My first suggestion would have been to not remove that section while it is under discussion here on the talk page... Shearonink (talk) 02:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
I disagree. A lot of the things he did either set a precedent (such as giving a farewell address) or were not repeated by each of his successors (such as being from Virginia). I say we keep them. Bkatcher (talk) 04:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Just as if he were the tenth President and that none of the previous 9 Presidents had these properties?? Georgia guy (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Georgia guy If you think that George Washington should be excised from this List maybe an official RfC is the best way to proceed. Personally, I think this List used to be a helluva lot of trivia across the board. These days, however, it's been trimmed down and the entries seem to be mostly - if not all - sourced from reliable sources. I will have to say that *if* an RfC did remove GW from this List I think I can guarantee that people will add or attempt to add his information back into the List All. The. Time. and his absence would be an ongoing source of controversy. Shearonink (talk) 17:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Races of Cabinet Members

We're getting a lot of 'First president to appoint a(an) African-American/Asian/Hispanic secretary/head of ***. I worry this article is going to get pretty bulky if we do that. Bkatcher (talk) 22:03, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

And now someone is adding judges and ambassadors and making a distinction between the first X man and the first X woman appointed. This article is getting bloated. Bkatcher (talk) 03:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Generational notability

People keep wanting to add Biden as the first president of the Silent Generation. I think we should avoid that, as such things often have vague and conflicting definitions. Bkatcher (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

This is notable, especially because of Biden's advanced age. And even with the vague and conflicting definition, Biden is still by all metrics the first president to be born in the silent generation. Using the most extreme metrics given in the article Silent Generation, anyone born between 1926 and 1945 is part of it. they youngest president born before Biden is Carter, who was born in 1924, and the oldest after Biden is Trump, born in 1946. ProfessionalGecko (talk) 03:13, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
In that case, do we include presidents from the Greatest Generation, the Boomers, etc? Bkatcher (talk) 03:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Best just say he was the oldest president ever to take office. Dream Focus 21:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
This is a list of presidential firsts, not superlatives. At one time, W.H. Harrison was the oldest president to take office. Bkatcher (talk) 05:03, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2021

First President to have two vice presidents. 162.246.6.155 (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. J850NK (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Sub sections

Biden's is the only section with sub sections. Is this necessary, as other sections seem longer?67.173.23.66 (talk) 22:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Almost all of Biden's firsts have to do with his cabinet and other appointments, which are historically diverse. I vote it should stay. Bkatcher (talk) 00:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
  • (as editor who made the edit) Simply more convenient for the reader imo, and multiple RS have noted that Biden is the first to have so many "firsts" with respect to his appointments, cf. Bkatcher above. I don't know whether Biden is the first president where sources and/or convenience justify using subsections, but, such are "firsts"... someone has to be. --Middle 8 (s)talk • privacy 22:58, 23 April 2021 (UTC) added text, 23:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC); 23:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC); 00:11, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

First Muslim federal judge

Isn't this just as due (source) as anything else in its subsection? I agree that the threshold for inclusion is up to editorial discretion, but would argue that it already meets that threshold since we already go beyond just the cabinet. (Re ES, I'd also be happy to include first Black, female, Jewish, Hispanic, Asian etc. judges under other presidents.) Ping: Bkatcher. --Middle 8 (s)talk • privacy 07:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

George Washington firsts

Someone removed all of Washington's entries because, logically, anything he'd do would be the first. However, a lot of things he did either set a precedent, like giving a farewell address, or were not things that any or all of his successors did, like being born in Virginia. I think they should stay, and I reverted the edit. Thoughts? Bkatcher (talk) 02:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

You have a point. Perhaps we should say with Washington that this only includes things that were precedents. Otherwise we should have an RfC because there's too many editors raising the logical point that I did, and being right...--Jack Upland (talk) 03:00, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Transgender Day of Remembrance

Is Biden's recognition of this holiday 'Too specific' as User:NJ1310 states? As opposed to Trump serving as a Grand Marshall of the Daytona 500 or addressing the March for Life? Bkatcher (talk) 01:40, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Honestly? Yeah, those and some others (like the Tulsa race massacre site visit, or the commutations one for Obama) are starting to get too specific and not transcendent enough in contrast with the older presidents. Just look at the sections for Lincoln and Truman, two very important presidents with not that much 'firsts' listed, only the most significant ones. It's not necessary to add that much. I specifically removed that one since it's the most recent one added, but others could be as well if there's a joint decision to do so. NJ (talk) 02:29, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

A first for President George H.W. Bush

I originally included the fact that George H.W. Bush was the first President to live at both Number One Observatory Circle and the White House. Walter Mondale was the only vice president who lived there before him. [1] I thought this source I had [2] proved it because this photo is featured in it. Should we include this fact?

--And1987 (talk) 05:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I think if we use this source it will work.[3]And1987 (talk) 17:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Post presidency firsts

Just to clarify, post-presidency firsts are to be included on the list, correct? Including J.Q. Adams's subsequent serving in congress, Taft's subsequent serving on the supreme court, Tyler lying in state for the CSA, Hoover outliving his entire cabinet, T. Roosevelt's receiving of the Nobel Peace Price and his posthumous Medal of Honor, Carter's lengthy marriage and longevity, and Trump's indictment, just to name a few. Trying to avoid an edit war. Bkatcher (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I do not think the "firsts" post-presidency should be included because they did not happen while they were serving as president, unless it pertains to something that happened during their presidency; like Trump's second impeachment. Master106 (talk) 03:52, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

It makes no sense to only list "firsts" accomplished in office as that would substantially ruin the point of this article. IE Trump's indictments post-presidency are just as important to presidential history as Taft serving as SCOTUS chief justice after his presidency. PaulRKil (talk) 12:55, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
I forgot about this discussion. I disagree, I do not think anything post-presidency is relevant at all. The article is to catalogue to presidential firsts. Trump's indictment did not happen during his presidency, so it is not a presidential first. He was not president when that happened, Joe Biden was. Master106 (talk) 14:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Upon further inspection, I noticed a section at the top that states it includes achievements of a president in their post-presidency. So I guess that is fine. However, I'll leave out the indictments since they are not achievements. Master106 (talk) 14:24, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Private spaceflight

this article notes that Trump was the "First president to directly support and oversee private spaceflight in the United States.", which doesn't seem true. "Support" is a bit vague, but commercial initiatives for NASA were begun under Bush Jr. in 2006 (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services) and actual private missions (Commercial Resupply Services) were flown under Obama, who after the phaseout of the Space Shuttle in 2011 also pushed for private manned flight for NASA (Commercial Crew Program) which finally occurred under Trump.

However, the first privat launch happened in 1982, and Reagan later signed the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 "which mandates NASA to encourage private spaceflight", so he should get the First for "Support". Bush Jr. was also the first to oversee private human spaceflight in 2004, see Timeline of private spaceflight for more details. jonas (talk) 02:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_United_States_presidential_firsts/Archive_1&oldid=1218109566"