Talk:Chuck Woolery/Archives/2017
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Chuck Woolery. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2017
 | This edit request to Chuck Woolery has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove the section on anti-semitism. The man made a simple comment pointing out a historical fact. Lets not ruin a mans reputation and accuse him of a great sin over a total NOTHINGBURGER. 76.176.132.44 (talk) 18:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}}template. - Mlpearc (open channel) 18:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)- First of all, it's not an "historical fact", in fact between 5 to 6% of Bolsheviks were Jews which is quite far from "most". Secondly, Lenin may have had some distant Jewish ancestry which he was unaware of but he wasn't Jewish, didn't identify as Jewish, didn't practice Judaism and was not even aware of having any Jewish ancestry. Marx was baptized a Christian while he was an infant and never considered himself Jewish. Woolery's claims are incorrect and come from the anti-Semitic canard of Jewish Bolshevism. Thirdly, the article isn't stating that Woolery is anti-Semitic but that he is being accused of anti-Semitism which is exactly what the Newsweek article on the question states. Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 19:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well, I agree with 76.176.132.44 that the "Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia" section ought to be removed from the article. The article states "Woolery has been accused of antisemitism" but it does not indicate why such accusations are notable, nor does it name the accusers (presumably they are private individuals on Twitter). It is my understanding that Woolery sent the relevant tweet yesterday. Is the mere accusation of anti-Semitism or Islamophobia such an inherently notable fact about a person that it requires immediate insertion into the subject's Wikipedia biography? In my view, WP:BLP and WP:Undue considerations counsel against the inclusion of these accusations at this time. DrQuinnEskimoWoman (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- It has gone beyond Twitter and was picked up by Newsweek, [1] a major news source, and now Ha'aretz [2], which is a major and well-respected daily. I'm fine integrating it into the "politics" section rather than have it as a separate section. The separate section was created because an IP kept removing the material and insisting it had to be in a separate section. Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- I still don't think it's notable or important to the article. Seems more like tangential gossip. Who exactly is accusing him of anti-Semitism? Has the Anti-Defamation League made a statement? Is it just a rule of thumb we have to document whenever a public figure is accused of anti-Semitism no matter the context? DrQuinnEskimoWoman (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- "Who exactly is accusing him of anti-Semitism?" New Republic senior editor Jeet Heer for one[3]. Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 17:10, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- I still don't think it's notable or important to the article. Seems more like tangential gossip. Who exactly is accusing him of anti-Semitism? Has the Anti-Defamation League made a statement? Is it just a rule of thumb we have to document whenever a public figure is accused of anti-Semitism no matter the context? DrQuinnEskimoWoman (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- It has gone beyond Twitter and was picked up by Newsweek, [1] a major news source, and now Ha'aretz [2], which is a major and well-respected daily. I'm fine integrating it into the "politics" section rather than have it as a separate section. The separate section was created because an IP kept removing the material and insisting it had to be in a separate section. Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well, I agree with 76.176.132.44 that the "Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia" section ought to be removed from the article. The article states "Woolery has been accused of antisemitism" but it does not indicate why such accusations are notable, nor does it name the accusers (presumably they are private individuals on Twitter). It is my understanding that Woolery sent the relevant tweet yesterday. Is the mere accusation of anti-Semitism or Islamophobia such an inherently notable fact about a person that it requires immediate insertion into the subject's Wikipedia biography? In my view, WP:BLP and WP:Undue considerations counsel against the inclusion of these accusations at this time. DrQuinnEskimoWoman (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Suicide
Woolery supposedly attempted suicide while hosting WOF.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.109.177.10 (talk • contribs)
- Really? I had never hear that. Do you have a source? And can you please sign your comments with four tildes? Joe 20:37, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Supposed by whom? And how is this relevant to Wikipedia? 184.189.217.210 (talk) 09:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Chuck Woolery. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071126033137/http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2007/11/emw571557.htm to http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2007/11/emw571557.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111105220150/http://www.theblaze.com/stories/chuck-woolery-sits-down-with-beck-and-explains-coming-out-as-a-conservative/ to http://www.theblaze.com/stories/chuck-woolery-sits-down-with-beck-and-explains-coming-out-as-a-conservative
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 09:07, 11 December 2017 (UTC)