| Revision as of 17:56, 4 December 2022 editDlthewave (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers21,588 edits →Noted for false and misleading statements: reTag: 2017 wikitext editor← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 21:20, 19 December 2024 edit undoGuiy de Montfort (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users792 edits →Edit request on 30 November 2024: Comment |
| (869 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{afd-merged-from|Tucker Carlson Network|Tucker Carlson Network|20 February 2024}} |
|
{{Talk header|archive_age=30|archive_units=days|archive_bot=lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|
|
{{Ds/talk notice|ap}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
| ⚫ |
{{Ds/talk notice|blp}} |
|
|
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Journalists|class=B}} |
|
|
{{On this day|date1=2019-05-16|oldid1=897423383}} |
|
{{On this day|date1=2019-05-16|oldid1=897423383}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|listas=Carlson, Tucker|1= |
|
{{WikiProject Biography |
|
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes |a&e-priority=low|politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=low}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low}} |
|
|living=yes |
|
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Media|importance=mid}} |
|
|class=C |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=mid}} |
|
|a&e-work-group=yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=high}} |
|
|listas=Carlson, Tucker |
|
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=low|American=y|American-importance=mid}} |
| ⚫ |
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Anti-war|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Media|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject California|importance=low|sfba=yes|sfba-importance=low}} |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Journalism|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Conservatism|class=B|importance=high}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Politics|class=B|importance=mid|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Anti-war}} |
|
|
|blp=yes |
|
|blp=yes |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Top 25 Report|Apr 23 2023}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{American politics AE |1RR=no |Consensus required=no |BRD=yes}} |
|
⚫ |
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|blp}} |
|
|
{{Refideas |
|
|
|{{Cite web |date=2023-06-07 |title=Телеведущий Такер Карлсон после увольнения с Fox News запустил шоу в своем твиттере |url=https://meduza.io/feature/2023/06/07/televeduschiy-taker-karlson-posle-uvolneniya-s-fox-news-zapustil-shou-v-svoem-tvittere |website=] |language=ru}} |
|
|
| |
|
⚫ |
}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
| algo=old(30d) |
|
| algo=old(30d) |
|
| archive=Talk:Tucker Carlson/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| archive=Talk:Tucker Carlson/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| counter=16 |
|
| counter=19 |
|
| maxarchivesize=100K |
|
| maxarchivesize=100K |
|
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}} |
| Line 29: |
Line 29: |
|
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Section sizes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Evidence TC was ever a Democrat? == |
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Paradise PD == |
|
|
|
|
|
He is depicted in this show, a lot. Why doesn’t it say it in here at all. #letthetruthbeknown #paradisePD ] (]) 04:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:It does not say it in here at all because no one has found the gumption to find an acceptable source and add it to the article. Don't just complain... be the change you want to see! ] (]) 04:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Drinking == |
|
|
|
|
|
I removed some recently added "material" about a friend saying he was a heavy drinker but quit. This should be looked at from a NPOV and due weight. Thank you, ] (]) 22:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Personal life section == |
|
|
|
|
|
Do we need half the section on "personal style and habits"? Can somebody trim this stuff and add it back into one section. He eats junk food and doesn't exercise? Really not that notable. Dead head? ok I guess. What else? ] (]) 22:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:I prefer the of the personal life section without the habits sub-heading. Some recent additions are ] sourced and may not be due. ] (]) 01:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::Are there any sources about his trademark "I-don't-get-it, all-those-long-words, I-will-drool-on-my-tie-now" facial expression? Or pictures of him doing it? The one marked "Carlson at the Immigrants' Rights rally" gets close, but there must be better ones. --] (]) 07:24, 8 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:. ] (]) 19:11, 8 November 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Removal of Kanye West interview section == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember him from his bow tie days and he's always been a right wing provocateur. He's been surprisingly consistent, he was offensive back then. ] (]) 05:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
{{u|Zaathras}}, this is ''yet another'' outrage of the week. This article is far too long already and this is just the sort of content that bloats the article but almost certainly doesn't pass the 10 year test. I get the view that this is an example of Carlson amplifying fringe views. However, if the intent is to include this as such an example we need a RS that is saying as much and then it would have to be included in a section about that, not in it's own section which suggests the interview itself was significant. IE, this is a supporting example of a bigger thing, this interview itself is not a bigger thing. Absent consensus to keep it in the article is should be removed. ] (]) 14:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Carlson was a registered Democrat in Washington, D.C. because to not is to ''de facto'' have no say in who is elected for anything because whoever wins the Democratic primary will win the general election in DC. ]<sup>]</sup> 05:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:The outrage over Kanye's antisemitism is longer than a week, and Tucker's milquetoast handling of it, by omitting the bits that made Kanye even more bigoted, is well-sourced. ] (]) 18:29, 3 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::I think West's recent comments will have lasting weight with respect to West's BLP. But I have trouble seeing how it will be lasting with respect to Carlson. ] (]) 19:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
| ⚫ |
::I have to agree, this is not about Carlson. ] (]) 19:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:Carlson's interview conduct received attention from a lot of ] sources in the United States and Israel , so I think ] suggests that it should be included. The paragraph could be rewritten to make the context clearer. ] (]) 02:33, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 October 2024 == |
|
== Deference and admiration toward some authoritarian foreign leaders == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit extended-protected|Tucker Carlson|answered=yes}} |
|
The passage {{tq|"On ''Tucker Carlson Tonight'' he has shown deference and admiration toward some authoritarian foreign leaders, notably ] of Hungary and ] of Russia"}} was removed with the rationale "it seems we would need better or more sourcing for this. Is this new?". {{u|Malerooster}}, what is the specific concern about the and what do you mean by "is this new?"? Did you consider adding a "better sourcing" tag or searching for sources yourself instead of removing reliably-sourced content? –] ] 02:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Period after quote: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
He expressed his disappointment with the Republican nominee for the ], ], and the ] he signed in 2006 as ], which contained an ], saying, "out of 315 million Americans, the Republican Party managed to find the one guy who couldn't run on ]". |
|
:You shouldn't restore disputed content until there is consensus to do so. I object to this recently added content on several grounds. First, Britannica is not a good source for controversial claims in a BLP. Britannica can be a good source for basic facts and as a guide to what a professionally editted encyclopedia felt was due. However, using it's not a good source for either vague or potentially controversial claims. That gets to the second issue which is this is a vague claim about Carlson. This is clearly a case where the details are important since they could range from "he admired that Putin is happy to have opponents killed" to something much more mundane. Given that this is a leading statement that could imply something about a BLP subject that isn't true, either the detail must be included (which opens the material up to DUE considerations) or it needs to go. Any such content is going to need more sourcing that just a WashPo "angry at Carlson again" article. ] (]) 13:33, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change to: |
|
:Dlthewave, i meant by new, was this "material" just added recently, or has it been in the article for awhile? If it was just added, and editors are questioning it, then there should be consensus for its inclusion, thats all. This seems to be a somewhat controversial claim, so it needs better, or more sourcing it seems. What do others think? --] (]) 16:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He expressed his disappointment with the Republican nominee for the ], ], and the ] he signed in 2006 as ], which contained an ], saying, "out of 315 million Americans, the Republican Party managed to find the one guy who couldn't run on ]." ] (]) 16:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{done}}<!-- Template:EEp --> ] | ] 19:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is his signature. Maybe update the Template and add it. https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:TuckerCarlsonSignature.svg <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:43, 24 October 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
This one isn't sourced to WaPo but are you saying that this needs a BETTER source than the WASHINGTON POST? What would that type of sourcing look like? –] ] 15:43, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Add Signature == |
|
:Sorry, you are correct here, this wasn't sourced to WP. You made several edits and I confused which one had which source. It was ''only'' sourced to Britannica. If that is the only source then we have a weight issue. Even if it was sourced to WashPo, the sentence as added is still a problem. It suggests something without providing correct detail. Imagine if someone said, "Well Hitler was right about that topic." and we included in their article that "X has said they agree with Hitler" with no other context. It seems like the sort of thing that could be taken to mean something that wasn't the correct context. Now what if we found the full context to be, "X said Hitler was right to view smoking as harmful to one's health." So basically X agrees with Hitler and the American Lung Association. Saying that someone's views align with a despised person/group without providing context is a classic smear technique. While that isn't always the intent of a writer, the fact that it's a potential and reasonable reading violates IMPARTIAL. ] (]) 17:08, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is his signature. Maybe update the Template and add it. https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:TuckerCarlsonSignature.svg ] (]) 04:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Noted for false and misleading statements == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Edit request on 30 November 2024 == |
|
The passage {{tq|"(Carlson) is often noted for false or misleading statements on his show"}}, sourced to and , was removed from the lede without a clear explanation. As one of the primary things that Carlson is known for, this seems relevant to the lede, especially since it's sourced to a top-tier newspaper. {{u|Malerooster}}, what are your concerns? –] ] 03:59, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could somebody please add how Carlson is sometimes called "Fucker Carlson" for his far right views? The source link is https://x.com/JohnCleese/status/1387377907111284737 ] (]) 11:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Britannica is not a good source for controversial claims about BLP subjects. Using WashPo as a source for such a generalized, subjective claim in Wikivoice is also an issue. This sort of generalized, negative, subjective claim about a BLP needs very strong sourcing. Additionally, it's inclusion really doesn't help the article. ] (]) 13:37, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:Again, this should get consensus before being restored. ] (]) 13:37, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
:X is not an RS. ] (]) 11:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:Apparently, simply requesting an edit is an attempt at vandalism now. Don't ask me why. ] (]) 17:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
::Its LEAD not lede, they are different and we should not be writing in the style using lede. We would need multiple reliable sources for the claim that "the primary thing that Carlson is known for". Just having an opinion piece pointing out mistakes would probable belong in the article about the show and not the LEAD section of a bio. Post some citations here and we can discuss. Thank you, --] (]) 15:22, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
⚫ |
::Who accused you of vandalism? ] (]) 17:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
:I'm confused about the assertion that this is a "controversial" claim; is there a prominent opposing viewpoint among reliable sources or is this merely a "controversy" among Misplaced Pages editors who don't like to see negative things written about right-wing figures? In any case, there are numerous sources cited in the article that mention false and misleading statements made by Carlson. They don't all need to be cited in the lead but here they are: , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Given the amount of coverage of false/misleading claims within the body of the article, I'm concerned that we might appear biased by omitting this from the lead. –] ] 17:56, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Is this type of language appropiate? --]] 21:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
I remember him from his bow tie days and he's always been a right wing provocateur. He's been surprisingly consistent, he was offensive back then. SatanicYakuza (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
Done 