Talk:The Reagans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub
This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
???
This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.

I think my copyedit will do--I mostly removed a redundant sentence. One real question, and one less serious one. The real one is, who are the scriptwriters? Are they out homosexuals? (Or is this the old anti-Hollywood gay-baiting.)

Less seriously, if I claimed that any movie or television program starring someone who is married to a GOP donor was inherently biased, I'd be justly laughed down. Why does anyone think the equivalent attack on Brolin is reasonable?Vicki Rosenzweig 02:56, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Here's an AP story on the current controversy: [1] It has some information that could be incorporated in this article. About casting Brolin, the story says it this way: "Casting James Brolin, husband of outspoken liberal Barbra Streisand, as Reagan is a deliberately provocative move, [critics] contend." The wording in this article at least needs to be fixed, if not removed entirely. -- Minesweeper 07:20, Oct 30, 2003 (UTC)

Ed: I think you've un-NPOVed it. Is the Drudge Report really a sensible source to quote? From a UK perspective I find the whole argument completely bizarre. If they have got someone with AIDS in the family does that really make them biased? The whole thing seems excessively defensive. Secretlondon 16:31, Nov 4, 2003 (UTC)


Since 2 people have questioned my neutrality (I just read the talk page for the first time this very minute), I will stop editing The Reagans for a while. --[Ed]

Contents

[edit] Dropped Link

I dropped this link:

It no longer goes to the article: normal practice for newspaper websites is to move articles to paid archives after a certain amount of time. Ellsworth 23:43, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Added Link

And I added this link (for the second time). Hopefully, nobody has anything against that.

[edit] Added links (again)

I have (re)added the following links, one of them for the third time (this is getting tiring):

Would the person responsible for dropping these links (one of them for the second time) be kind enough to tell us exactly why he or she is constantly doing so? ˜˜˜˜

[edit] Time?

The article says it's a four-hour miniseries. The DVD I got from Netflix says it's three hours long. Which is it? --Micahbrwn 16:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] one of Reagan's daughters deleted from A Controversial LIne Excised

The sentence contradicts itself

one of Reagan's daughters, no family members, or close friends ... were consulted

I think the sentence meant

none of Reagaon's ...

Since family covers daughters I replaced it with

no family member or close friend ... was consulted

NYCDA 18:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dropping it again

I deleted the link again... I see no reason why a link to a Right wing opinion column that simply claims "Liberals are Hypocrites" has anything to do with this article. If anyone has an objection and a reason for inclusion, I will not object SirChuckB (talk) 05:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)