Talk:Karl Rove: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:37, 6 September 2009 editSW3 5DL (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers21,544 edits →Justafax Civility Issues ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 06:49, 20 October 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk \| contribs)Bots7,418,606 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. The article is listed in the level 5 page: Political scientists, theorists, and writers.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion
(466 intermediate revisions by 89 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Skip to talk}}
			{{Talk header\|search=yes}}
	{{controversial}}		{{controversial}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|blp=yes\|class=B\|vital=yes\|listas=Rove, Karl\|1=
			{{WikiProject Biography\|s&a-work-group=yes\|s&a-priority=}}
			{{WikiProject United States\|importance=mid\|TX=yes\|TX-importance=mid\|UTA=yes\|UTA-importance=}}
			{{WikiProject Conservatism\|importance=mid}}
			}}
			{{To do}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|archiveheader = {{~~talkarchivenav~~}}		\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
	\|maxarchivesize = 75K		\|maxarchivesize = 75K
	\|counter = 8		\|counter = 10
	\|minthreadsleft = 7		\|minthreadsleft = 7
	\|algo = old(~~15d~~)		\|algo = old(45d)
	\|archive = Talk:Karl Rove/Archive %(counter)d		\|archive = Talk:Karl Rove/Archive %(counter)d
	}}		}}
			{{Online source\|year=2005\|section=March 21-31
	{{talkheader}}
	{{WPBS\|blp=yes\|1=
	{{WPBiography\|living=yes\|class=B\|priority=mid\|listas=Rove, Karl}}
	{{WikiProject Texas\|class=B\|importance=mid}}
	{{UTTalk}}
	}}
	{{onlinesource\|year=2005\|section=March 21-31
	\|title=Rove, Bush's top strategist, to speak here on Thursday		\|title=Rove, Bush's top strategist, to speak here on Thursday
	\|org=Helenair.com Independent Record		\|org=Helenair.com Independent Record
	\|date=March 30, 2005		\|date=March 30, 2005
	\|url=http://www.helenair.com/articles/2005/03/30/helena_top/a01033005_05.txt}}		\|url=http://www.helenair.com/articles/2005/03/30/helena_top/a01033005_05.txt}}
	{{todo}}

	== "Armitage was responsible for the leak" ==

	Reading through the Rove article, I came across:

	In late August 2006 it became known that Richard L. Armitage was responsible for the leak.

	Of course that was a specific leak referring to Novak,
	but Rove, Libby and others were involved in leaking Plame's name to
	other journalists. Whether Rove or Libby were charged for
	any illegal acts or not in leaking her name, they leaked as well.

	Please fix the wording somehow.

	== Number of children in famly ==

	Karl Rove has five brothers and sisters. Please correct.

	Paul Harris, “Geek gets it” <ref>http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1598577,00.html</ref> The Observer, Sunday October 23, 2005
	He was born in Denver, Colorado, the second of five children.

	== Number of Children in Rove famly ==

	Larry Abramson and Madeleine Brand, “Karl Rove Dodges Indictment in CIA Leak Probe”.<ref> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5481842 </ref> June 13, 2006 , NPR Legal Affairs

	Born in Denver on Christmas Day 1950, Karl Rove was the third of five children. The family moved often during his childhood -- from Colorado to Nevada before settling in Salt Lake City.

	== Karl Rove joining the fox political team? ==

	How about a section on joining the Fox News program? I will go research more information on it...
	--unrgsrd 21:41 Saturday 02 February 2008

	== Add Category:Fox News Channel ==

	Now that Rove is working for Fox News Channel, the following category should be added:
	Category:Fox News Channel

	== References ==

	<references/>

	== Dust here has settled, some thoughts ==

	I'll be frank. The blocking of ] came a bit late for my taste. However, he was found to be in violation of the 3 revert rule, and to again quote the policy which ironically Malke was threatening people with and was himself found to be in violation of:

	" A ] exists on edit warring, known as the '''three-revert rule''' (3RR). If an administrator has not acted already by this point, then action is very likely, especially if a report is made to the ]. '''Policy forbids edit warring generally, and editors may be ]ed if they edit war, with or without breaching 3RR.''' "

	I commend ] for taking the actions he did. The subsequent complaints Malke made, and his promise to cease his activity in order to get unblocked a few days later, are a matter of record on his user talk page. Malke has since deleted the notifications, but they are viewable in his talk page history, and make interesting reading.

	After Malke's block on August 19, 2009, I decided I needed to take a step back. For the past ten days I have busied myself with other Misplaced Pages subjects. I now return to this page. I suggest we talk a bit about what happened, and I also suggest we take a look at what happened here this month, edit by edit. It continues to seem clear to me that Malke was editing with obsession towards an agenda; his obsession got him in hot water with the admins. Soon, Misplaced Pages policy is going to change, as many here know. I'd welcome some reasonable discussion, and renewed work on the article. ] (]) 19:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

	On closer examination of the history pages of the main article, it appears some of Malke's biased edits, through sheer volume, are still in effect. I propose going through every edit of his, see exactly what changes of his have survived, and put back all relevant, sourced material. Once that is effected, we can pick up the chore of dealing with further improvements. ] (]) 21:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

	:Having just returned to WP from an extended absence, I am not fully familiar with what has occurred with this article, but cursory skimming of the talk page reminds me of some of the frustrations which led me to leave WP more than a year ago. I recognize Malke's concerns. Material that is added back should strictly follow ], ie., it should be directly relevant to Rove, not defamatory, and should be sourced by reliable secondary sources. ] (]) 21:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

	::Malke's concerns were one thing, his methods another. Admins blocked him not only due to his violation of the three edit rule, but because he was deleting paragraphs of properly sourced material, and as the admins noted (to quote directly from Malke's talk page history, since he has since, for obvious reasons, deleted all reference to his blocking):

	::{{unblock reviewed\|1=I followed Misplaced Pages policy and removed unsourced material from the Karl Rove biography in accordance with WP rules. Each time I do this, and discuss it on the talk pages, it is removed without discussion by Chhe and others. This is simply piling on, and I'd like an impartial administrator to review this. Thank you.\|decline=Actually, you removed several sourced sections, so that isn't true. The thing you seem to be confused about is the idea that declaring your intention on a talk page does not give you carte-blanche to enforce your preferred version of an article. Discussion is to happen ''in lieu'' of editing when your changes are contested. ]''''']''''' 23:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)}}

	::- *An impartial administrator just did; I don't know you from Adam, and haven't so much as looked at the contents of your edits; all that matters is that you broke ], and received a short block for it; if you want to be unblocked, all you have to do is agree to stop edit warring, regardless of whether you think it is justified or not. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 23:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

			== Changed "agnostic" notice ==
	::'''I highly commend the admins, and urge others to support their work. These admins had not been involved here previously; they took firm, direct action on a disruptive editor, Malke, who was judged to be making "untrue" statements regarding his efforts. I again suggest we move past this period of turmoil and examine what changes were made to this article by an editor whose tactics earned him a block and who, in my view, obsessively used every tactic he could to get what he wanted.''' ] (]) 17:13, 1 September 2009 (UTC

			While I don't want to discount the reference that had been given to affirm Rove's agnosticism, I think that the ProCon.org quote that seems to have come directly from Rove (I think it is a sufficiently credible source) casts enough doubt on his purported lack to warrant my changing what was there. However, if anyone finds what I wrote overly long, feel free to cut it down to the essentials. I also know that the book used as a reference seems to come from after the ProCon.org quote was given, but as it stands, I think its far more likely that the comment in that book about his agnosticism was made without knowledge he had deliberately denied such a claim. It is entirely possible that Rove is some kind of crypt-atheist/agnostic, but as it stands, I think his own words about his personal beliefs are more credible than a secondary source. ] (]) 09:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
	== Starting work on repairing Malke's edits ==

			== History, and the current state of the article: a proposal to merge ==
	As of today I am going to slowly, edit by edit, go over material Malke has deleted or modified. As a first effort, I've added back a description of who ] actually is to the article, more precisely to the section in particular "Allegedly informing Jack Abramoff about the invasion of Iraq". This gives the section more depth to a casual reader.

			I was involved in this article in the 2009-10 era. There were two editors who worked from what I would term a pro-Rove perspective, both eventually blocked numerous times, both who saw fit to change their identities, and eventually one was banned and the other sanctioned at ArbCom. At the time, I gradually tired of their endless efforts to, as I saw it, sanitize Rove and his record, and walked away. (It might be worth noting that I was never blocked.) One aspect I found particularly unfortunate was the splitting of the article in two, namely the section on Rove during the Bush Administration being removed. That separate article seems quite weak to me, as it is isolated, and I suggest we reincorporate it back into the article and expand it. Given editor interest in this article, I would like to see it improved, but would like to gauge editor interest. In other words, who is actively interested, both in the article and my suggestion that we merge the orphan article back into the main one? ]]] 12:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
	To someone editing with a pronounced pro-Rove agenda, convicted felon Abramoff is not a good character for Mr. Rove to be sitting with, so Malke pulled the description, in my view to sanitize his hero's reputation. I'm not entirely happy with the reference however, which is 'Salon', a lefty blog, though of longstanding duration and, to some, solid reputation. To others, this may be grounds for challenging the reference and the description of Mr. Abramoff. ''IMPORTANT: The ref need not come from 'Salon', there are many sources for this information. I use this as a test case. It is on grounds such as these that Malke made his cuts, which however ended up in his being blocked by the admins.''
			:I am surprised by the lack of reaction. I'll give it a bit more time, but a closer look at the article reveals serious flaws. Sections read like a resume. ]]] 18:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

			== Is this one line addition notable? ==
	Again, since the reference merely describes Abramoff in a somewhat awkward way (I've trimmed it for brevity; we don't need to know exactly where Mr. Abramoff is serving his federal sentence, for example) a different reference could easily be found that is more 'mainstream'. My question: is this going to be an ongoing issue?

			] It seems that this one line comment isn't notable and was only added to provide a link for a new article of questionable note. What do other editors think? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:05, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
	Again, I do not propose to restore every word Malke has cut. (He has also added material, this also needs review.) I suggest instead that the article be tightened and improved. Rove is an important and highly controversial figure in recent US history, and is highly polarizing. For the sake of Misplaced Pages, let's get this article straightened out.
			:The addition is noteworthy and a significant viewpoint reliably sourced to multiple reliable sources including '']'' and '']''. If you believe the subject of this article is not notable, you may nominate it for deletion. Please sign your comments. Thank you. ] (]) 20:24, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
			::The topic of this article is ]. Your addition is not and it's inclusion is questionable due to ]. Including it to attempt to bolster an article you recently created is questionable editing. ] (]) 21:47, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
			:</small>

			The content is a significant viewpoint prominent in multiple reliable sources, including '']'', '']'', '']'', '']'', the '']'', and others; please see ].
	I await input from concerned parties. This is a cutting-edge issue: Let's talk this over and establish some ground rules and a consensus that will set precedent from which we can further operate. Thanks. ] (]) 17:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

			<blockquote>In February 2012, Rove said ]'s '']'' ] featuring ] was a sign of ].</blockquote>
	UPDATE: I see that the ] article has a section on this topic very nearly identical to the section in the Rove article. One could make a case for a referal to the Abramoff article. Or not. ] (]) 18:02, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

			# {{cite news \|title=Republicans See Politics In Chrysler Super Bowl Ad \|first1=Jeremy W. \|last1=Peters \|first2=Jim \|last2=Rutenberg \|newspaper=] \|date=February 7, 2012 \|page=A13 \|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/us/politics/republicans-see-politics-in-chrysler-super-bowl-ad.html \|accessdate=September 5, 2015 \|quote=“The leadership of auto companies feel they need to do something to repay their political patronage,” Mr. Rove said on Fox News, where viewers of the network’s morning program “Fox & Friends” rated the ad their least favorite of the game. “It is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising.”}}
	UPDATE 2: So that is your reply, ], to just delete with no discussion? I'm calling for a consensus; your edit is not a promising start, given what has been going on here for the past month. I disagree with both the edit and your approach. ] (]) 19:31, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
			# {{cite news \|title=Corporate News: Super Bowl Ad Goes to OT --- Chrysler, Dealers Deny 'Halftime' Ad Was Political; Furor Draws Web Shoppers \|last1=Bennett \|first1=Jeff \|last2=Vranica \|first2=Suzanne \|newspaper=] \|date=February 9, 2012 \|page=B2 \|quote=The following day, the advertisement became fodder for talk shows after Republican commentator Karl Rove said he was offended by the commercial. He described it as "a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising."}}
			# {{cite news \|title=Karl Rove ‘offended’ by Clint Eastwood’s Chrysler ad \|first=Rachel \|last=Weiner \|date=February 6, 2012 \|accessdate=September 5, 2015 \|newspaper=] \|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/karl-rove-offended-by-clint-eastwoods-chrysler-ad/2012/02/06/gIQAYt3HuQ_blog.html \|quote=“I was, frankly, offended by it,” said Karl Rove on Fox News Monday. “I'm a huge fan of Clint Eastwood, I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, but it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising.”}}
			# {{cite news \|title=Clint Eastwood Super Bowl Ad is Chrysler's Pay Back for Auto Bailout: Karl Rove \|first=Dan \|last=Rivoli \|date=February 6, 2012 \|accessdate=September 6, 2015 \|newspaper=] \|url=http://www.ibtimes.com/clint-eastwood-super-bowl-ad-chryslers-pay-back-auto-bailout-karl-rove-406474 \|quote=I was, frankly, offended by it. I'm a huge fan of Clint Eastwood. I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, he added. But it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising and the best wishes of the management, which is benefited by getting a bunch of our money that they'll never pay back.}}
			# {{cite news \|title=Clint Eastwood's Super Bowl ad riles Karl Rove \|date=February 8, 2012 \|accessdate=September 7, 2015 \|first=David \|last=Horsey \|newspaper=] \|url=http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/08/nation/la-na-tt-eastwood-rove-20120207 \|quote=Rove said he was offended. He said it was Chicago-style politics at work.}}

			] (]) 16:36, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
	: First of all, there is nothing wrong with the way I edited. There's a principle of 1RR, which means that you object to an edit without any drama and we talk here. Your phrase ''your edit is not a promising start'' makes you sound like some stern octogenarian schoolmaster in a bad 1950s Ealing studios film, and certainly not someone interested in consensus. Let's not mirror Malke's false civility, and get back to AGF editing.
	: Second, to business. In my opinion, the extended details about Jack Abramoff in that paragraph stuck out like a sore thumb, and could be seen as a means to smear Rove by association. Abramoff associated with lots of people in the Bush administration and elsewhere, however. Rove was nothing special in this. Of course, Abramoff's convictions are important, which is why I left a small reference to them in. However, this is an article about Rove, and he was not implicated in any of Abramoff's actions. What are your reasons for including such extra detail?] (]) 20:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
	:: I have to agree, the detail that the parenthetical text exhibited was far more than necessary. ] (]) 20:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	::: Boy for someone supposed to be against drama, you hurl insults freely. We have had some serious issues on this page, and I wanted to talk over the edit. You want to edit then talk. OK, fine. ] (]) 22:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
	::::C'mon ppl, let's comment on content, not each other. I thought the information given was much too detailed for what was needed. Perhaps "fraudster" isn't encyclopedic, but a succinct more encyclopedic term can be found. ] (]) 01:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	===Further Changes===
	*Don Siegalman
	This seems a tangential item at best and is related to Rove mostly through wishful thinking from the looks of it. ] (]) 21:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
	:Slightly unrelated to Siegalman, but I added back in the the paragraph about the subpeona stuff since I found two other references that address it. Wasn't too difficult. I also clarified the end of the last sentence a bit. I forgot to put in an edit summary so I'm posting here.] (]) 22:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
	:: Agree that this paragraph is important. Good work restoring it. Not to mention Rove's refusal to testify to the U.S. Congress is distorting real history. I've been looking at Soxwon's user page. He is an unabashed political partisan, and will have to be looked at as such. ] (]) 23:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
	:::Oh plz, I've worked with ppl from both sides of the spectrum w/o any problems. I removed the information b/c it was linked to a copyvio youtube video per wikipedia policy. Anyways, getting back to the topic at hand, why is Siegelman's conviction so important to Rove? It's brought up by a single magazine editor and in an extremely offhand manner in a NYT editorial. It's rather dubious to make so much of something when really it has nothing to do with the man. ] (]) 01:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	::::Removed rehashing of Siegelman case and trimmed section, though I still feel the hearsay should not be in the article. ] (]) 13:10, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	::::: Let's be fair, it's not mere hearsay, it's investigative journalism. It's perfectly acceptable in wikipedia if it is published by a reliable source, so long as its status ("claim", "allegation", "rumour" etc.) is made clear. I think there should be more information about the circumstances of the case (the election) so that readers can understand the nature of the accusation (i.e. that it was to win an election). The problem was that the previous version was poorly structured and came across as flabby.] (]) 13:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	:::::: Agree with Vsevold, though I find it amusing that now he wants to discuss after throwing insults about my own attempts to discuss. ] (]) 13:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

			I have just added archive links to {{plural:3\|one external link\|3 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx\|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx\|nobots\|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
	===Removal of sourced material===
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051129193728/http://blogcritics.org:80/archives/2004/09/04/135514.php to http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/09/04/135514.php
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050422052224/http://www.onthemedia.org:80/transcripts/transcripts_060404_roving.html to http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_060404_roving.html
			*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/384676.html

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
	Here we go with Soxwon. He's throwing picked up Malke's position and is back at it, removing sourced material, or pulling stuff because he doesn't like the source and doesn't care to do the work to establish a source that is more 'mainstream'. Look at his user page, look at his edits, and tell me this is anything other than agenda-driven. Need backup or we just go round and round with the same old. ] (]) 03:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	:Assume Good Faith. Please strive to maintain civility and focus on the article not on personalities. ] (]) 03:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	::Ok Jusdafax that's out of line. The edits I made were legit, so instead of just assuming how about you discuss them? I rmved an unsourced claim that basically said he abused his power and disregarded national security regularly, and was as contentious as it comes. The other bit was rmved, not only b/c it went into undue detail when it could be summarized quite easily but b/c it is sourced to an op-ed piece that is so far from neutral or scholarly that I would question its inclusion at all. ] (]) 04:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	:::I'm going to let the dust settle before I go into this further, except to say that the record shows, clearly, that after Malke was blocked and ten days went by, that I called for a discussion on what had happened and if we could reach a consensus on editing policy. My request was ignored. ] (]) 14:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	If by reaching consensus, you mean discuss every single edit before editing, then I would oppose, because it's (a) unwieldy and (b) against the spirit of wikipedia to have a couple of editors telling others they can't edit according to normal wikipedia practice. 1RR works fine for everyone else; preliminary discussion of edits should only be reserved for big changes or ones where editors would like the advice of others first. Malke was annoying as hell; that doesn't mean you need to remain annoyed long after.] (]) 02:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false}}
	== Rove and the terrorist alerts ==

			Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">]:Online</sub></small> 08:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
	Soxwon, I don't agree with the removal of the material on the alerts, but I agree it needs to be sourced. Suspicion about alert timings have been aired in several notable places; as far as I remember NYT and the Washington Post at least in the US have alluded to it, and I'm pretty sure there are a few books as well. That is, real world notable people and institutions have alleged that he abused his power and disregarded national security regularly. Exactly where such material should go is another matter; the paragraph is set up to discuss Rove's closeness to Bush, rather than Rove's strategic contribution to Bush's campaign.] (]) 06:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	:That's fine, but a claim of that nature needs to be sourced before it goes in. The current source doesn't even mention Rove. ] (]) 12:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
	::Re-added, not entirely satisfied, but at least the citations mention Rove by name now. ] (]) 12:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

			== External links modified ==
	::: Many thanks for your efforts and co-operative editing. Actually, I'll have to be honest and say I'm finding it hard to find anything reliable about Rove and the alerts beyond Howard Dean's accusations (which is RS in terms of being an opinion with due weight). Tom Ridge, who admits the timing of alerts were often politically motivated, mentions Rumsfeld putting pressure on him, but no mention of Rove. Personally I find it perfectly plausible that Rumsfeld could have been behind it, as it's in keeping with the accounts of his behaviour that have come out since he left office. Does anyone else have better sources on Rove's possible involvement?] (]) 13:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	== No messages on my personal page, please ==

			I have just added archive links to {{plural:2\|one external link\|2 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx\|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx\|nobots\|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
	If you want to talk to me regarding editing, and now, civility issues, please talk about them here openly and not on my personal page. Thanks. ] (]) 02:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070820214335/http://www.msnbc.msn.com:80/id/20253121/site/newsweek/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20253121/site/newsweek/
	:FYI, actually ''this'' talkpage should be about ''this'' article. Whereas civility and some editing issues should be addressed at the user's talkpage. If things are heating up it's likely best to step back a bit before posting, and that's directed to all editors, i haven't read anything here as of yet. ] 16:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100308064106/http://www.karlrovebook.net:80/ to http://www.karlrovebook.net

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
	== archiving ==

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false}}
	I've boldly added auto-archiving here as this talkpage is full of stale threads, it should kick in within a day or so. ] 16:10, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

			Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">]:Online</sub></small> 05:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
	== Justafax Civility Issues ==

			== Did Karl Rove write the article? ==
	Hello Jusdafax:

			Did the super controversial Karl Rove write the article himself? Karl Rove is considered one of the dirtiest players in the history of politics and is equal to Machiavelli in reputation. Why isn't that somewhere within the opening summary of the biographical figure? I am sure there is plenty of literature and investigative journalism out there on the Web to corroborate Karl Rove's controversial side and in many cases, criminal activity... ] (]) 04:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
	Before you prejudge me, perhaps you should bother to contact me. I've left several messages on the Karl Rove talk page indicating where I have found problems with the article which is obviously slanted against Rove. You claim I must be pro-Rove, but that just tells me you're not interested in neutrality. This article attempts to only wrap this man in scandal and thus it diminishes the spirit of Misplaced Pages which is neutrality. I see lots of criticism and I see my work being randomly reverted, but I don't see anyone else attempting to neutralize this article. So please let's all know where you and the others stand on this. Is the agenda to smear Rove or is it to give the article neutrality. Please keep in mind the people who will come to Misplaced Pages to research this and any other topic. The first reaction is negative and for anyone who is only mildly well read, it will be obvious that the slant is against Rove.] (]) 05:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

			==Hi there!==
	Wow, I didn't realize that it was THAT bad...
	I'd be willing to put my edits back and hold off on anything else until an admin looks at this if it will make life easier. ] (]) 16:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

			by what standard of evidence would Misplaced Pages accept a source for verifying Karl Rove as having the most punch-able face? Please and thankyou, <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	I'm glad to see you two talking. I am not an admin, but I have a lot of experience with BLP cleanups. I did not see a problem with Soxwon's edits, and commented thusly on the BLP noticeboard. Try not to jump to conclusions about editors and an agenda you may perceive them to have. You may find it a lot easier to work productively with someone you disagree with than you expected. You might want to review ] as well. - ] (]) 08:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:49, 20 October 2024

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Karl Rove article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 45 days

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This

level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

United States: Texas / University of Texas at Austin Mid‑importance

	United States portal 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 Misplaced Pages. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas - University of Texas at Austin.

Conservatism Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list for Karl Rove: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2009-11-21

Note: Clicking the "edit" link above takes you to this todo list page where you can add or edit items to be done. When finished, save the page and return to the article's main discussion page. Click on "purge" to update the todo list items.

Shorten considerably the information on the Plame affair or summarize it thoroughly on the main page and offload its full contents to a daughter article
Remove article-wide NPOV notice; replace, if necessary, with section NPOV disputes
Verify article sources, determine level of impartiality and notability
Clarify the timeline and the pertinent facts in the Vietnam War/Draft section.
Talk page: Improve format of comments from new users
Siegelman has been released from a seven-year sentence in a federal penitentiary.
Make a graphic to show Rove's successes in the congressional/senatorial races and delete the excessive use of sectioning off each race. Each race does not deserve it's own section since each section only has one unreferenced sentence.
Move up the sections on George W. Bush's gubernatorial and presidential races and expand them to include Rove's strategies and tactics.
Compress the scandals into one section and off-load content to other articles.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"Rove, Bush's top strategist, to speak here on Thursday". Helenair.com Independent Record. March 30, 2005.

Changed "agnostic" notice

While I don't want to discount the reference that had been given to affirm Rove's agnosticism, I think that the ProCon.org quote that seems to have come directly from Rove (I think it is a sufficiently credible source) casts enough doubt on his purported lack to warrant my changing what was there. However, if anyone finds what I wrote overly long, feel free to cut it down to the essentials. I also know that the book used as a reference seems to come from after the ProCon.org quote was given, but as it stands, I think its far more likely that the comment in that book about his agnosticism was made without knowledge he had deliberately denied such a claim. It is entirely possible that Rove is some kind of crypt-atheist/agnostic, but as it stands, I think his own words about his personal beliefs are more credible than a secondary source. Kevin Corbett (talk) 09:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

History, and the current state of the article: a proposal to merge

I was involved in this article in the 2009-10 era. There were two editors who worked from what I would term a pro-Rove perspective, both eventually blocked numerous times, both who saw fit to change their identities, and eventually one was banned and the other sanctioned at ArbCom. At the time, I gradually tired of their endless efforts to, as I saw it, sanitize Rove and his record, and walked away. (It might be worth noting that I was never blocked.) One aspect I found particularly unfortunate was the splitting of the article in two, namely the section on Rove during the Bush Administration being removed. That separate article seems quite weak to me, as it is isolated, and I suggest we reincorporate it back into the article and expand it. Given editor interest in this article, I would like to see it improved, but would like to gauge editor interest. In other words, who is actively interested, both in the article and my suggestion that we merge the orphan article back into the main one? Jus da fax 12:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I am surprised by the lack of reaction. I'll give it a bit more time, but a closer look at the article reveals serious flaws. Sections read like a resume. Jus da fax 18:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Is this one line addition notable?

] It seems that this one line comment isn't notable and was only added to provide a link for a new article of questionable note. What do other editors think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Springee (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

The addition is noteworthy and a significant viewpoint reliably sourced to multiple reliable sources including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. If you believe the subject of this article is not notable, you may nominate it for deletion. Please sign your comments. Thank you. Hugh (talk) 20:24, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

The topic of this article is wp:note. Your addition is not and it's inclusion is questionable due to wp:weight. Including it to attempt to bolster an article you recently created is questionable editing. Springee (talk) 21:47, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

The content is a significant viewpoint prominent in multiple reliable sources, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, International Business Times, the Los Angeles Times, and others; please see WP:DUE.

In February 2012, Rove said Chrysler's Halftime in America Super Bowl advertisement featuring Clint Eastwood was a sign of Chicago-style politics.

Peters, Jeremy W.; Rutenberg, Jim (February 7, 2012). "Republicans See Politics In Chrysler Super Bowl Ad". The New York Times. p. A13. Retrieved September 5, 2015. "The leadership of auto companies feel they need to do something to repay their political patronage," Mr. Rove said on Fox News, where viewers of the network's morning program "Fox & Friends" rated the ad their least favorite of the game. "It is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising."
Bennett, Jeff; Vranica, Suzanne (February 9, 2012). "Corporate News: Super Bowl Ad Goes to OT --- Chrysler, Dealers Deny 'Halftime' Ad Was Political; Furor Draws Web Shoppers". The Wall Street Journal. p. B2. The following day, the advertisement became fodder for talk shows after Republican commentator Karl Rove said he was offended by the commercial. He described it as "a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising."
Weiner, Rachel (February 6, 2012). "Karl Rove 'offended' by Clint Eastwood's Chrysler ad". The Washington Post. Retrieved September 5, 2015. "I was, frankly, offended by it," said Karl Rove on Fox News Monday. "I'm a huge fan of Clint Eastwood, I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, but it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising."
Rivoli, Dan (February 6, 2012). "Clint Eastwood Super Bowl Ad is Chrysler's Pay Back for Auto Bailout: Karl Rove". International Business Times. Retrieved September 6, 2015. I was, frankly, offended by it. I'm a huge fan of Clint Eastwood. I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, he added. But it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising and the best wishes of the management, which is benefited by getting a bunch of our money that they'll never pay back.
Horsey, David (February 8, 2012). "Clint Eastwood's Super Bowl ad riles Karl Rove". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved September 7, 2015. Rove said he was offended. He said it was Chicago-style politics at work.

Hugh (talk) 16:36, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Karl Rove. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051129193728/http://blogcritics.org:80/archives/2004/09/04/135514.php to http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/09/04/135514.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050422052224/http://www.onthemedia.org:80/transcripts/transcripts_060404_roving.html to http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_060404_roving.html
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/384676.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Karl Rove. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Did Karl Rove write the article?

Did the super controversial Karl Rove write the article himself? Karl Rove is considered one of the dirtiest players in the history of politics and is equal to Machiavelli in reputation. Why isn't that somewhere within the opening summary of the biographical figure? I am sure there is plenty of literature and investigative journalism out there on the Web to corroborate Karl Rove's controversial side and in many cases, criminal activity... Stevenmitchell (talk) 04:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there!

by what standard of evidence would Misplaced Pages accept a source for verifying Karl Rove as having the most punch-able face? Please and thankyou, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.233.182 (talk) 00:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Categories: