Talk:James Kirchick: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:25, 9 January 2012

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

LGBTQ+ studies Start‑class

	LGBTQ portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Journalism Unassessed

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Homosexual

James Kirchick is homosexual and Jewish by his own admission. This hardly constitutes vandalism as I provided a reliable source(his own words: http://www.indegayforum.org/news/show/31319.html). Whoever reverted the edit, just thinks that somehow this is negative. Well, if you view being Jewish and homosexual as a bad thing then that is your own bigotry.

It may not be vandalism, but it's irrelevant. If that's not the case, why not list the religion and sexual preference of every person with a Wikipedia biography? Wespomeroy (talk) 05:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

It would be nice to have references in addition to the Yale newspaper. Please see if you can expand and add other credible references. Thanks! A little mollusk (talk) 18:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Opening Part

I changed it back to reflect his first coming to national attention after the academic free speech controversy. It was his first national appearance, and while not as flattering as the Ron Paul reportage, should be mentioned. The Ron Paul reportage has been moved to where the article discusses his criticism of contemporary Libertarians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.4.17.250 (talk) 15:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

readding cat

was moved with wrong summary, it was not a unsourced link.

The category was sourced at http://www.indegayforum.org/news/show/31319.html as mentioned before, he self-identifies as jewish.Mightyerick (talk) 05:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

reverting to remove bias

I reverted back to the version that balances Kirchick's Ron Paul articles by citing others writers who challenge the voracity of his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlong19 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You used a source that is not reliable. As per Wikipedia's Policy on biographies of living persons, all claims must be sourced. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 07:58, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kirchick Integrity

The article seems to pat James Kirchick on the back because he "exposed racist and conspiratorial newsletters published by Texas Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, a story that gained new prominence in the 2012 presidential election.

An investigative report by "Reality Check," which can be found here, calls into question Mr. Kirchick's journalistic integrity, specifically the validity of his "exposé." It appears that he intentionally left out the page containing the name of the freelance writer who, it seems, authored all of the racist and bigoted newsletters published under Ron Paul's name.

This new information should find its way into the article. Otherwise, that section of the article can always be deleted, and we could avoid the trouble.

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 I reverted back to the version that balances Kirchick's Ron Paul articles by citing others writers who challenge the voracity of his work.  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Rlong19|Rlong19]] ([[User talk:Rlong19|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rlong19|contribs]]) 15:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 :You used a source that is not [[WP:RS|reliable]].  As per Wikipedia's [[WP:BLP|Policy on biographies of living persons]], all claims must be sourced.  [[User:The Mark of the Beast|The Mark of the Beast]] ([[User talk:The Mark of the Beast|talk]]) 07:58, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
+== Kirchick Integrity ==
+The article seems to pat James Kirchick on the back because he "exposed racist and conspiratorial newsletters published by Texas Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, a story that gained new prominence in the 2012 presidential election.
+An investigative report by "Reality Check," [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP-mYq4DaJI which can be found here], calls into question Mr. Kirchick's journalistic integrity, specifically the validity of his "exposé." It appears that he intentionally left out the page containing the name of the freelance writer who, it seems, authored all of the racist and bigoted newsletters published under Ron Paul's name.
+This new information should find its way into the article. Otherwise, that section of the article can always be deleted, and we could avoid the trouble.