Svetlana Velmar-Janković

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Conservatism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as High-importance). United States: History High‑importance 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as High-importance). Presidents of the United States: Donald Trump High‑importance 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 StatesUnited States Presidents High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by the Donald Trump task force.

The "Transition period, inauguration, and first 100 days" section includes two sentences about Project 2025.

In the first paragraph, there is this:

"His transition team is expected to rely on the work of the America First Policy Institute, rather than The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that garnered controversy during the election for Project 2025, a set of initiatives that would reshape the federal government."

1. Change the verb tense from "is" to "was."

2. "Expected" by whom? And were they telling the truth? Because in the third paragraph, this is this:

"Four days into Trump's second term, analysis conducted by Time found that nearly two-thirds of his executive actions "mirror or partially mirror" proposals from Project 2025, which was seconded with analysis from Bloomberg Government."

1. Can this article please reconcile the statements before Trump took office distancing him from Project 2025 with the reality? Because there's another notable article, out today from CNN, with this title: "Trump said he hadn’t read Project 2025 – but most of his early executive actions overlap with its proposals".

And it includes this paragraph:

"'This is exactly the work we set out to do,' Paul Dans, who oversaw Project 2025 at the conservative Heritage Foundation, told CNN in an interview Wednesday. 'It's still in the early first stages of bearing fruit, but we wanted to make sure the president was ready to hit the ground running on day one. The rapidity and the depth of what they’ve rolled out this quickly is a testament to the work done in Project 2025 and other presidential transition projects.'"

source: Trump said he hadn’t read Project 2025 – but most of his early executive orders overlap with its proposals | CNN Politics

So after all the pretense, they're now flatly admitting the connection. NME Frigate (talk) 17:30, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Change "2017 to 2021" to "2016 to 2020" in the first paragraph referring to the Donald j Trumps previous term as president. 50.34.96.158 (talk) 21:43, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: He was president from January 20, 2017 to January 20, 2021. ⟲ Three Sixty! (talk, edits) 21:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In lead paragraph. He is not from Florida, he is from New York and moved to Florida. T g7 (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He has been a legal resident of Florida for a few years now. Mar-a-Lago appears to be his primary residence in fact as well as formality. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone actually call it this? Come on. 2600:4040:4938:6500:3893:FC35:B315:45DD (talk) 22:25, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's in a surprising number of headlines, actually. I agree though - I don't think I've seen it used once outside of titles. Komkast22 (talk) 00:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's too tacky. Stick with First Trump or Second Trump when referring to actions, policies, or cabinets of his two presidencies. TheFloridaTyper (talk) 14:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, it is indeed mentioned both on the titles and their contents in multiple renowned publications out of 256 million entries, such as:

• Time magazine: Bennett, Brian; Popli, Nik (November 24, 2024). "Where Trump 2.0 Might Look Very Different From Trump 1.0". Time (magazine). New York City, N.Y. Retrieved February 26, 2025.
• The New York Times: "Trump 2.0: Rewriting Histories – Watch or listen to our political round table breaking down President Trump's latest week in office". New York Times. New York City, N.Y. February 21, 2025. Retrieved February 26, 2025.
• CNN: Wolf, Zachary B. (February 15, 2025). "Your questions about Trump 2.0 — inflation, ignoring court orders, Medicaid and more — answered". Washington D.C. Cable News Network. Retrieved February 26, 2025.
• NBC News: Kapur, Sahil (January 28, 2025). "Democrats' playbook for Trump 2.0: Tune out the noise and focus on economic issues". Washington D.C. Retrieved February 26, 2025.
• The Diplomat magazine: Kuo, Mercy A. (January 9, 2025). "Trump 2.0: Great Power Politics and the New World Order – Insights from Tiberio Graziani". Washington D.C. Retrieved February 26, 2025.

Hereby have no comment, but there probably will be more to come in the near future...Cheers! Mickie-Mickie (talk) 16:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 2025 United States constitutional crisis has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9 § 2025 United States constitutional crisis until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 08:33, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 2024 United States Constitutional Crisis has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9 § 2024 United States Constitutional Crisis until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 09:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The excerpt taken from the article 2025 Trump–Zelenskyy meeting that is used in the 2025 Trump–Zelenskyy meeting section in this article is problematic in that it can't be edited. While the WP Template:Excerpt page doesn't discourage it, the page says "This practice has various advantages and disadvantages." In this article I venture that the excerpt is disadvantageous because it can't be edited and, at the least, any mistakes or enlargements of citations cannot be made. It would seem best therefore to transfer the complete text with citations from the page source and use that, rather than just use the link. It would thus be independently editable, which it is not at the moment. I would hope to do this in the next day or so. Richard Nowell (talk) 09:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^{To end the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Trump's administration suspended the provision of intelligence and military aid to Ukraine, offered concessions to Russia, requested half of Ukraine's oil and minerals as payment for U.S. support, and said that Ukraine bore partial responsibility for the invasion. These moves have been criticized by most United States' allies and by many international organizations.}

This portion is extremely poorly phrase. Trump has no intention of ending Russian invasion of Ukraine, but to force Ukraine to capitulate. A NPOV alternative could be.

^{Regarding the Russian-Ukraine war, Trump's administration suspended the provision of intelligence and military aid to Ukraine, offered concessions to Russia, requested half of Ukraine's oil and minerals as payment for U.S. support, and said that Ukraine bore partial responsibility for the invasion. These moves have been criticized by most United States' allies and by many international organizations.} Polmas (talk) 18:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Change "Trump's singing of executive orders" in section "Executive orders" to "Trump's signing of executive orders". C.A. Fantasy Author (talk) 00:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Cannolis (talk) 02:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump frequently promised to exact retribution and revenge against perceived political enemies through his 2024 campaign, and has said he has "every right" to go after political opponents. The source cited by the author of this comment does not even come close to claiming this. The source states clearly and plainly: "[Trump's] return to the White House has sparked anxiety about how much power he has to upend their lives." listing potential mechanisms the president could use. I suggest changing it to how it is stated in the source and not distorting the information. HANGMAN1 (talk) 23:32, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source that was already present described it this way: "President Trump has said he has “every right” to go after political opponents." I also just added another source that supports the language used in the article:

Since 2022, when he began preparing for the presidential campaign, Trump has issued more than 100 threats to investigate, prosecute, imprison or otherwise punish his perceived opponents, NPR has found.

A review of Trump's rally speeches, press conferences, interviews and social media posts shows that the former president has repeatedly indicated that he would use federal law enforcement as part of a campaign to exact "retribution."

I took out the part about revenge since he didn't explicitly use the word revenge in his statements. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 06:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that reference 331 and 396 (as of the time I'm sending this) are duplicate references, but as reference 331 is from an excerpt in another article, I have no idea how to merge the two together. Can someone think of a way to remedy this? CorrectionsJackal (correct me) 08:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody must have fixed this. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The references are still there. Now they are references 406 and 471. CorrectionsJackal (correct me) 14:24, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, CorrectionsJackal. They moved again. Maybe you could learn how to name refs at WP:REPEATCITE. It's a useful skill. If you have trouble holler again but this time please tell me what the refs say so I can find them. Good luck. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know about ref names, and if you look at the article history, I've been repeatedly removing duplicate references. However, since one of the references is from a direct excerpt from another article, it is tricky to use ref names. Either I use ref names on the one used directly on the article (which would cause problems if that excerpt were to be removed), or use ref names on the article that this article is taking an excerpt from (which would cause problems if that excerpt were to be altered so that the reference is removed, plus issues with the other article, etc.)

There's a DuplicateReferences extension, which should tell you the numbers of the duplicate references because they are very prone to changing for the subject of this article. CorrectionsJackal (correct me) 01:06, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't give me any of the ref content. Maybe someone else will help you. Signing off. -SusanLesch (talk) 02:20, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here's the ref link: https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/01/31/nx-s1-5282274/trump-administration-purges-health-websites CorrectionsJackal (correct me) 02:27, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think Trump's actions regarding the legal profession and the coverage of that issue are so extensive as to be useful to have their own article. I would going to work on setting that up. Let me know if people feel differently. Remember (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Making the separate article since I didn't hear any objection. Remember (talk) 15:39, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And to clarify, I created the article here - Targeting lawfirms and lawyers under the second Trump Administration. Remember (talk) 01:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add to the public opinion the Cory booker filibuster 24.0.157.166 (talk) 00:38, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 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. Cannolis (talk) 00:44, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Due to concerns about the length of the article, there's some ideas on how to move some of the information to other pages.

These are how some topics were arranged under Trump's first term, it may be a good idea to create a version of these pages for his second term.

Social policy of the first Donald Trump administration

Economic policy of the first Donald Trump administration

Environmental policy of the first Donald Trump administration Cahlin29 (talk) 03:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cahlin29: I'd support this. We're not even three months in to a four-year presidency and this article is already unwieldy and getting far too long. We will invariably have to make these splits eventually, so we might as well do them now. DecafPotato (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone would be so daring, here are the red links to make it easier:

• Social policy of the second Donald Trump administration
• Economic policy of the second Donald Trump administration (currently a redirect)
• Environmental policy of second Donald Trump administration

DecafPotato (talk) 15:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wholeheartedly agree. I also helped in editing the page, and its gotten so long, then again, Trump is moving at lightning speed. Over 111 executive orders and we haven't even closed off April. TheFloridaTyper (talk) 19:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a user created Science policy of the second Donald Trump administration I expect more types of these pages will be created in the coming months. Cahlin29 (talk) 10:16, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support splitting this article similar to the first term. And I also support @DecafPotato's title proposals. Though should we make this an RFC? Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 11:59, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bondegezou tagging you here in case you want to work with any of these editors to spin-off information from this article. Cahlin29 (talk) 17:31, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, I created Science policy of the second Donald Trump administration as it was one of the larger sections without its own article. DecafPotato's suggestion is obviously sensible. Bondegezou (talk) 08:49, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest an easy way to deal with article size is to remove §Background? All or most of this information is easily found elsewhere. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article has to be coherent within itself, so some Background is appropriate. I hacked it down a lot recently and it could probably be further abbreviated, but something needs to remain.

Long-term, the article will keep growing, so creating spin-off articles and summarising issues here is the way to go. Bondegezou (talk) 11:33, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just created Education policy of the second Donald Trump administration; we can probably now summarize most of the content in this article in the "Education" and "Actions against higher education" sections. DecafPotato (talk) 12:46, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really think that the protests against trump should get their own section, or at least in a "reactions" section Not a kitsune (talk) 15:52, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This topic has its own articles, many of them. For example, Protests against Donald Trump and Protests against the second presidency of Donald Trump. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then I think there should be a link there Not a kitsune (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added a bunch. You're welcome to add more. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:14, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Not a kitsune (talk) 14:28, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to propose splitting the current Actions against political opponents and the media section on this page to a separate Government targeting of political opponents under the second Trump administration page. This new page would serve as the top-level page for the relevant Targeting of law firms and lawyers under the second Trump administration, Activist deportations in the second Trump presidency, and other pages that will be created as time goes on and Trump expands his targeting of political opponents and civil society.

Pinging @Soibangla owing to your great work on creating pages on this topic in the past. BootsED (talk) 00:28, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is MASSIVE. (like the low taper fade). How can we make it shorter, I think removing stuff he thought about doing but hasn’t or just removing fluff like unnecessary elaboration. General ideas but what do you think Eg224 (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See conversations above. Cahlin29 (talk) 06:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In "Actions against political opponents and the media" near the end of the first section:

"nd has said that he wpuldjail reporters who refuse to name the sources of leaks."

Ive noticed that it says "wpuldjail", which i assume should bw "would jail".

i. e. change wpuldjail to would jail pretty please Robertthelama (talk) 18:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC) robert :3[reply]

 Already done Done by Loserhead EvergreenFir (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

well, i was gonna reply, but thanks loserhead (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And we’d have a week or so. I think it’s fine for there to be some overlap. But now would generally be the time to act.

And we could start an article, “Second 100 days . . ” And later on, maybe “First half of second year . . ”

If we don’t act, the danger will be that our article is either too skimpy or too long. For example, a person remembers that something was a big news story, looks it up in our article, but he or she finds little information.

Your ideas please. Thank you. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 18:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]