Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Loonymonkey (talk | contribs)
CENSEI (talk | contribs)
Line 157: Line 157:


:::::Just out of curiousity CENSEI and Otolemur, have either of you lobbied for a [[Criticism of John McCain]] article as well or is this just about wanting to criticize Obama? --[[User:Loonymonkey|Loonymonkey]] ([[User talk:Loonymonkey|talk]]) 20:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
:::::Just out of curiousity CENSEI and Otolemur, have either of you lobbied for a [[Criticism of John McCain]] article as well or is this just about wanting to criticize Obama? --[[User:Loonymonkey|Loonymonkey]] ([[User talk:Loonymonkey|talk]]) 20:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

:::::: I think that criticism forks suck as much as anyone here, but considering that any material of a critical nature, or even material that is perceived as potentially critical is stripped the moment is touches this article doesn’t inspire much faith in me that all editors are looking to write a good article. [[User:CENSEI|CENSEI]] ([[User talk:CENSEI|talk]]) 20:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:47, 19 August 2008

Template:Community article probation

Featured articleBarack Obama is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 18, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 5, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
January 23, 2007Featured article reviewKept
July 26, 2007Featured article reviewKept
April 15, 2008Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article

More comic relief

Barack Obama rickrolled - this one is pretty clever, but it amazes me that people actually make the effort. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admins and editors, please put The Obama Nation on watchlists

This book, The Obama Nation officially came out today. (Front-page New York Times article about it here.) It's a partisan book that has already received a lot of criticism about accuracy from news organizations and groups on the left. I assume the article is going to attract a lot of bad behavior, too. It might be a good idea to put the Obama-probation label on its talk page, since Obama-related articles are covered by it. Noroton (talk) 00:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention, it's at the top of the NYT bestseller list, another reason why I expect the article on it to get contentious. Noroton (talk) 00:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admins and editors, please put The Case Against Barack Obama on watchlists

I just created an article on David Freddoso's The Case Against Barack Obama, which is competing with Jerome Corsi's The Obama Nation. -- Noroton (talk) 00:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria of entries within the Cited works section?

There are three books in this short section: two texts written by Obama and one biography about Obama (by Mendell). What does this section signify? Texts written or endorsed by Obama? If so, the list is incomplete. If the criteria is something else, then maybe the References section needs a cross-check. —Kanodin 05:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

teleprompter candidate

There is no reason or need to delete this It fits with NPOV very well, source is refered to. --Cretino (talk) 23:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems extremely peripheral for main biography, and not worth including. LotLE×talk 23:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The edit seems to violate WP:DUE. Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 00:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above. This falls several orders of magnitude below the threshold for something that deserves space in a summary style biography. If we wanted to include every criticism everyone ever made of every politician out there, the typical politician's article would be several megabytes long. --Clubjuggle T/C 03:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have twice previously been forced to revert this edit by Cretino (July 30, August 14). From a campaign standpoint, it is noteworthy that Republicans have branded Obama as the "teleprompter candidate" as part of their election strategy, and it may warrant a mention in Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008. A less partisan source than The Weekly Standard (Rupert Murdoch's neoconservative opinion magazine) would need to be found, of course. Equally McCain's complete ineptitude with the device, resulting in repeated calls for joint town hall meetings, may warrant a mention in John McCain presidential campaign, 2008. -- Scjessey (talk) 11:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth (and about on the same level of discourse) Paris Hilton is seemingly the most articulate of the bunch, having reportedly done her lone position statement entirely from memory without the aid of a teleprompter.[4] On the other hand, some are insisting that the no-teleprompter story is just a campaign ploy and that she actually did use one.[5] Could this be teleprompter-gate? Wikidemo (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible that WP:WEIGHT would not be violated by including a mention of her use/nonuse of a teleprompter in the Paris Hilton article. ;-) As for Obama, he obviously wasn't relying on a teleprompter during his various interviews with the editorial boards of newspapers (many videos are available) and he did fine, so I see no point in including yet another ooh!ooh! Republican campaign talking point in this article. I further see no point in reducing Wikipedia articles into trash-talk, red-top recyclers of lies, rumors and innuendo. Flatterworld (talk) 13:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A new user tried to include this in the German WP and after he was blocked for being insistent (incl. edit-warring) he was blocked the very same day and it took him no time trying to edit it (again with a new account) here, (also the same day). Not saying s/he is the same but it was discussed before (sometimes in mid July I think) and discharged. Nothing changed till then. --Floridianed (talk) 04:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1.3 million, really?

I donno, 1.3 million just seems surprisingly low. I suppose that doesn't take into consideration his wife's money or something? --M4390116

The source is this, and it seems to be joint number. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. The only thing missing is her retirement plan. --Bobblehead (rants) 03:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to ask but what's your point, M4390116? --Floridianed (talk) 04:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the drop in housing prices (and the stock market) since the article was written, it's probably high. Flatterworld (talk) 13:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

Why there is no article titled Criticism of Barack Obama? This article also lacks any information on criticism. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In almost all cases, the creation of a criticism article is considered a POV fork. Criticism of Obama, where appropriate, is woven into the body of this article (and its child articles). Please refer to the 33 pages of archived discussion for specifics. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck getting any criticism in here. CENSEI (talk) 19:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The reason there is no "Criticism ..." article is because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It's hardly possible to read WP:CRIT often enough or carefully enough. LotLE×talk 19:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are so many criticism articles like Criticism of George W. Bush, Criticism of Hugo Chavez etc. Then what is the problem with Criticism of Barack Obama? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The individuals who currently WP:OWN this article, will not allow that to happen. CENSEI (talk) 19:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
@ User:Otolemur crassicaudatus - A good Wikipedian will follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, not other articles, for the proper approach. This is a featured article because of a strict adherence to Wikipedia principles and the diligence of editors keeping the article accurate and neutral. Bush and Chavez are individuals that have attracted such a staggering amount of criticism that in the eyes of the editors of those articles, special criticism articles are necessary. Obama, in contrast, has attracted very little criticism - and that has been proportionately and sensibly integrated into the article when appropriate. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
@ User:CENSEI - As I explained to you on your talk page, please keep your personal opinions about other editors out of article talk pages and remain civil. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just out of curiousity CENSEI and Otolemur, have either of you lobbied for a Criticism of John McCain article as well or is this just about wanting to criticize Obama? --Loonymonkey (talk) 20:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that criticism forks suck as much as anyone here, but considering that any material of a critical nature, or even material that is perceived as potentially critical is stripped the moment is touches this article doesn’t inspire much faith in me that all editors are looking to write a good article. CENSEI (talk) 20:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply