Talk:James Taranto

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

anywords on this guys age? or where he's from?

Contents 1 revert reasons 2 Enthicity / Religion 3 POV Issue 4 POV Issue 5 verification of sources 6 Dead links in examples 7 Taranto discusses Wikipedia

[edit] revert reasons

1. I'm removing the "false or misleading statements" bit. It is clearly POV, and citing some blog as "evidence" just won't due. I understand the point; Taranto frequently uses straw man arguments both for polemical and humorous purposes. But that's pretty much the terrain of all political humor. If you really want to make the point, just quoting him and letting readers decide for themselves if his statements are false or misleading would be the way to go.

2. I'm also removing the bit about his Jewish father. I've read a fair bit of Taranto, and he has noted on several occasions while discussing religion that he is non-religious. I've seen no evidence (beyond a recent human interest story about an uncle) that Jewish ethnicity informs his work, or even that he considers himself Jewish. As such I can't see how his father's background is of interest to anyone who isn't a lunatic anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist worried about Jews in the media. But if I'm wrong, by all means correct me. (And sorry if I'm overreacting; I just find it a little creepy because it seems to be pervasive that wiki articles label Jews as such even when it is totally irrelevant.) - Bert 171.159.64.10 23:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Enthicity / Religion

I added the bit about his father merely because Taranto himself mentioned it in his article about his uncle. I just though people might be curious about the origin of his name (he's not Canadian)... It wasn't mean to label him a zionist or one of the jews in the worldwide plot to control the media. But we can keep it out.

Shouldn't there be mention of his callous "bulldozer accident" comments in regard to Rachel Corrie's death? --69.215.77.47 19:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV Issue

The statement at the end of the paragraph, "Notably, the last 'Good News Watch' entry is from June 2004", seems a violation of the POV rules. The implication is clearly that the absence of "Good News" from Iraq is an indication of Taranto's opposition to US involvement in Iraq. Mossy64 12:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• I agree and have removed the word "notably" from the article. Lordjeff06 21:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not even sure why the Good News Watch should even be here at all. Considering that there are plenty of current Best of the Web features not mentioned in this wiki article, why even mention one that hasn't been around for three years? Can someone explain why the Good News Watch is worthy of keeping in this article? It seems to me the only justification for keeping it is to make a political point about the Iraq War, not to say anything relevant about James Taranto. Can someone provide a more cogent justification for not removing mention of the Good News Watch? (August 1, 2007)

[edit] POV Issue

In the third paragraph of the article, there is a statement concerning "parents who support abortion [...]" This would be much more sensible if it read "parents who support abortion rights [...]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.125.92 (talk) 00:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] verification of sources

Yes i know that the links should be to the article that Taranto provided with a new headline. But there needs to be verification of the headline not the article pointed to - Taranto's original page with the headline should provide the link.

Most of these have gone dead btw. --Kim D. Petersen 12:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dead links in examples

I recently replaced examples/exceprts with the dead links (as mentioned by Kim D. Petersen) with fresher ones. On review, I realise that the WaPo link will go dead in a few weeks, but at least the Post has a decent archive. Here's another one from today:

• Would She Have Been So Arresting if She Hadn't Gone Topless?

"New York City Pays $29,000 for Arresting Topless Woman"--headline, CNN.com, June 18

If this link still works in a few weeks, it might make a good example of Taranto's light-hearted media criticism in BOTWT.

Should we mention his "Zero-Tolerance Watch" series? Some of those are really alarming! Cheers, CWC 16:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

This one is too good to miss.

But Only She Would Inhale

"Bernstein: Clintons Would Operate Joint Presidency"--headline, New York Sun, June 20

—BOTWT, June 13, 2007

The Sun archives items after 45 days. Cheers, CWC 16:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taranto discusses Wikipedia

Best of the Web Today for September 7, 2007 mentions Wikipedia, specifically this AfD (under the heading "Lanny Davis Is Romanian?"). I mention this just in case it ever becomes relevant to the article. Cheers, CWC 12:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)