Talk:Natural-born-citizen clause

definition of natural born citizen
nowhere in this article does it define what the term actually means 2A01:4C8:800:56BC:1:2:CF4A:8D9D (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The lead sentence defines the term "Natural-born-citizen clause". The definition of the term "Natural-born-citizen" would be separately up to each of the individual countries having constitutions where that term appears. Some of those countries probably define the term more clearly than others. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Indonesia
Indonesia was added to the list in this recent edit and the entry was modified in the next two edits (one by me). I've had second thoughts about whether it belongs in the list at all and, if so, what the entry ought to say. I've not been trained in the law, Indonesian or otherwise, but what looks like the relevant part of Article 6 here reads:

Three other points before I comment:
 * 1) I have no information regarding what further regulation of requirements by law may have taken place.
 * 2) The constitution seems to use citizen and national there and elsewhere as if they are interchangeable.
 * 3) Article 26 provides that foreigners may be legalized as Indonesian citizens.

OK, Consider this: Can that person, who is an Indonesian national who has never acquired another citizenship by his/her own will, become a candidate for president? If the answer to that question is "yes", it seems to me that Indonesia does not belong in this list. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) A person acquires citizenship in another country not through choice but by circumstances of birth (jus sanguinis or jus soli);
 * 2) that person (a foreigner) is later legalized as an Indonesian citizenship, thereby becoming an Indonesian national

Article topic
says, "The first paragraph should define or identify the topic with a neutral point of view, ...". Several recent edits to the opening paragraph (one by me) differ in interpretation of the meaning of the term "natural born". A consensus resolving such differences or, if they cannot be resolved, a consensus of whether and how such POV different views should be presented should be presented should be arrived at through discussion here -- not through edit warring in the article.

I suggest a second lead section paragraph clarifying this somewhat. My understanding is that the meaning of the term Natural-born is neither well defined nor universally agreed either between countries or within individual countries, but I haven't quickly been able to locate a reliable source supporting an assertion to that effect. In searching, I did note that the Oxford English Dictionary appears to contain a circular definition of the term, defining it as indigenate, adj. but using "natural-born citizen" in the definition of that term ). Discussion? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I like your current version. AFAIK, the edit war was not about defining the term but more about staying on the topic of the article per its title, which is not about the words "natural", "born", or "citizen" in isolation from each other. Those can be examined in the body, but the beginning of the lead should not be vague. It should stick to the full phrase, which it does with your version. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 15:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks but, going a bit beyond my stated concern, I think WP:STAND app;ies here. As I read that, the body of such articles should be "composed of one or more embedded lists, or series of items formatted into a list". As I read, though, the "lead" of such articles might follow its lead section with one or more (short) titled sections applicable to list members as a group. Since the constitutions of some listed countries do not use the term Natural born, I also think that a short section, perhaps titled Terminology, relating "Natural born" to " Burthright" citizens and perhaps mentioning jus soli and jus sanguinis would be helpful. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 18:35, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe so. How about proposing it here so we can work on it and make it a bullet proof addition? -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 19:23, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Following on the above, I propose that the following be added at the end of the introductory paragraph:

Please discuss as needed, rewording as necessary to achieve editorial consensus. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:25, 4 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Having seen neither discussion nor objection, I have bade this change. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 18:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)