Old page wikitext, before the edit (old_wikitext) | '{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Controversial}}
{{Calm}}
{{Not a forum}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes
|class=B
|a&e-priority=Mid
|a&e-work-group=yes
|listas=Maher, Bill
}}
{{WikiProject Religion|class=B|importance=mid|Interfaith=yes|InterfaithImp=}}
{{WikiProject Comedy|bio=yes|class=B|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Libertarianism|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Atheism|class=B|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject New York|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=B|importance=mid}}
}}
<!-- please do not remove this tag -->
{{Auto archiving notice|small=no
|age=45
|index=./Archive index
|bot=MiszaBot I}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:Bill Maher/Archive index
|mask=Talk:Bill Maher/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 125K
|counter = 5
|minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(45d)
|archive = Talk:Bill Maher/Archive %(counter)d
}}
== Dealing vs Selling ==
[[User:Xenophrenic]] please stop saying "per cited sources" when there is ''one'' source (singular). And please state what your objection to the phrase "dealing marijuana" really is. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 17:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
:"Selling" is more succinct, with fewer connotations. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 18:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
::Firstly, how is "selling" more succinct than "dealing"? "Dealing" denotes "buying and then selling at a profit", which is precisely accurate, conveying the facts succinctly. This is why ones says "dealing marijuana" rather than "buying marijuana and then selling it at a profit". Secondly, you do not state what you mean by "connotations". The only "connotation" I can think of is that of "buying and selling at a profit". Naturally one could wish that dealers would always sell things "at cost" but the profit motive is fairly universal (or at least, very common), not what people would generally call a "connotation". (The word "dealing" applies to a broad range of things, furntiture, antiques, drugs, etc.) [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 18:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
::However, "buying and selling at a profit" is the ''meaning'' of the word, not a "connotation". Perhaps you mean the possible connotation of dealing illegal drugs, such as marijuana? Obviously, that can't be it, either. Please explain here what connotation is worrying you. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 22:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Skipping past the commentary, and answering your questions: "Selling" is more succinct than "dealing", which has many more variations in usage and meaning. As for "Perhaps you mean the possible connotation of dealing illegal drugs, such as marijuana?" No, I meant what I said: "Selling" is more succinct, with fewer connotations. I've removed the personal interpretations and returned the referenced wording. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 19:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::I see you are trying to edit-war your personal interpretation into the article. I've removed it, and returned the reliably sourced information. Your edit summary says "he has said this on many occasions", which may or may not be true, but certainly isn't conveyed by the cited source. [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 19:16, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::::Ignoring my "commentary" or, reasonable request for you to explain your objection, is not a [[WP:ABF|good faith]] response. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::::I didn't ignore your commentary; I read it, and didn't see where there is anything in the commentary that required a response. Meanwhile, I've already explained my objections to your edits. Perhaps if you could explain how your proposed edits would improve the article? [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::::It is funny that a Wikipedia article categorised as a "libertarianism article" is being [[WP:EW|desperately]] [[WP:OWN|sanitised]] of a reliably sourced and totally uncontroversial mention of [[drug dealing|dealing cannabis]]. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:51, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, like that happened. "Funny." [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
==="Dealing cannabis" versus "selling pot"===
Can the article state that "Maher has said that he supported himself financially in college by dealing cannabis", given that it is not disputed that he has frequently said that he did, and there is a source in the article confirming that? ([[User:Xenophrenic]] says not.) [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:Incorrect. It is presently unsourced that he said that. The source has Maher saying: "selling pot allowed me to get through college and make enough money to start off in comedy", which is what our Wikipedia article also accurately says. According to your [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bill_Maher&diff=687626152&oldid=687625485 edits], you decided to change "selling" to "dealing", after giving your personal opinion that {{xt|"Dealing" denotes "buying and then selling at a profit"}}. Seriously? Did it say that in the cited source, right before where he said he grew his own and sold it? Then you wiki-linked "dealing" to the [[Illegal drug trade]] article. Clever. Could you please explain what improvement you are proposing, because I know what it looks like... [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::{{!xt|"Seriously? Did it say that in the cited source, right before where '''he said he grew his own and sold it?'''"}} Stop lying. As you know, the reference does not state that, in fact that would be a clearly libellous statement. Do you want to explain why you made it? [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 20:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::What statement? I asked a question. You aren't making sense. Perhaps if you could explain how your proposed edits would improve the article, that would be a good start. [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 05:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Certainly. I got a bit dramatic there, I think I misunderstood what you were saying.
*Using a direct quote for a non-controversial fact like this is not normal. It is preferable to just state the fact instead. It is more concise, and also avoids giving any misleading impression, for example that that the fact may be debatable, or that he has only made the claim once. Saying "He has said that... he dealt cannabis", as per my edit, also does conveys exactly where the info is coming from in any case. It is just the standard way to state the fact, without beating around the bush so to speak.
*Saying "dealing cannabis" is the regular phraseology in common use, readily understandable and not open to any misinterpretation. Therefore, it should be used as the standard encyclopedic wording. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 06:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
::Thank you for the reasonable response, but it appears we still disagree on a couple points. Conveying uncontroversial or unambiguous facts directly, rather than as a quotation, is fine, but when there is any possibility of ambiguity or the slightest difference in interpretation, we must adhere to the source — that is not only "normal" convention, but required. An attributed direct quote is the surest way to meet that requirement, and it does so without conveying anything "debatable" (you are confusing it with [[scare quotes]]) or anything about how many times he repeated the claim. As you'll note, when you first converted the quotation to a prose statement, I had no objection with that, although I did make a [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bill_Maher&diff=687381083&oldid=687317359 minor change] of your word "dealing" to "selling" to conform to the cited source. The issue was never whether to convey the information as a quotation or as a prose statement. Then you again replaced the sourced word "selling" with your preferred unsourced word "dealing". Repeatedly. And you argued above (unconvincingly, in my opinion) that we should use your wording rather than the sourced wording. You obviously feel there is a significant difference between your word and the sourced word, otherwise you would not have so vigorously edit-warred to replace what Maher said with what you want to say. And you are correct; there are indeed differences between "selling" and "dealing", in both meaning and perception — which is why we should stick to what he actually said. Perhaps you missed [http://sspw.dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/sspw/pdf/mslesson.pdf Lesson 2]? In many states, there is a legal difference between selling, trafficking, dealing and distributing. Even in your personal definitions given above, you say ''"Dealing" denotes "buying and then selling at a profit"''; okay, so perhaps he was both selling and dealing. Whether he was growing it and selling it, or buying and reselling, or harvesting it from the (very common in the 70s) urban vacant lots in his neighborhood and selling it, he doesn't say. Let's avoid inserting our own extended interpretations of what Maher said, shall we? Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 17:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Of course there's a difference between the words selling and dealing. He was dealing, as he made %100 perfectly clear when he spoke about it on his show, earlier this season. Cultivation is actually a more serious offense, and of course requires more effort and resources to produce commercial quantities. "Harvesting from urban vacant lots" sounds like an urban myth - sure maybe it happened infrequently, but anyway that's not what he did. Unfortunately, a quick google search doesn't produce any RS repeating what he said on his tv show, which I guess would be required, if your objection is that you deliberately want to allow for the possibility that he may have been given the stuff by a [[The_Fabulous_Furry_Freak_Brothers#Characters|hippy cousin]], or whatever. I agree that the quote does allow that possibility (since dispelled this year on his show, as I said); without a written source, I admit you have a point. It is possible, even, that he deliberately left that vague, previously, out of fear. I wonder. It's also possible of course - or even, likely - that he just made up the whole thing for his image. On balance, I have to agree that leaving the quote in quote marks is best. Thanks for discussing. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Bill Maher]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=698332963 my edit]. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110906155003/http://www.intouchweekly.com:80/2011/03/bill_maher.php to http://www.intouchweekly.com/2011/03/bill_maher.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 13:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to {{plural:3|one external link|3 external links}} on [[Bill Maher]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=703887890 my edit]. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111106044244/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#40225161
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121210011702/http://theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=218 to http://www.theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=218
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051108055750/http://www.savvyinsider.com:80/article.php?op=viewArticle&article_ID=305 to http://www.savvyinsider.com/article.php?op=viewArticle&article_ID=305
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 06:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Bill Maher]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=722230680 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090830072642/http://www.tonightshowwithconanobrien.com:80/video/clips/bill-maher-pt2-082409/1149697/? to http://www.tonightshowwithconanobrien.com/video/clips/bill-maher-pt2-082409/1149697/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 19:33, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
== Allegations by Johnsen ==
I would like to remove the following sentence: "Johnsen had previously accused another former boyfriend of rape and kidnapping in 1997, and the charges were later dismissed for lack of evidence."
It is unrelated to the allegations against Maher and clearly establishes bias. Lack of evidence does not prove a pattern one way or the other, and in any case should not be stated in this article (it is already in hers). The fact that no action proceeded against Maher should stand by itself. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.234.125.91|99.234.125.91]] ([[User talk:99.234.125.91#top|talk]]) 13:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Further, if the insinuation is this is part of a pattern it should be stated explicitly and supported. Otherwise this is simply a stated fact meant to imply Johnsen is not to be believed. In any case this is more suited to her article. Why is a case predating their relationship relevant to Bill Maher? [[Special:Contributions/99.234.122.127|99.234.122.127]] ([[User talk:99.234.122.127|talk]]) 03:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
::Reliable sources detailing Johnsen's allegations against Maher also detail her past allegations against others. So yeah, they are related according to reliable sources. You are correct that lack of evidence doesn't prove a pattern one way or another, which is why our article doesn't say there is a pattern. Wikipedia conveys what reliable sources say. If you want to add that it is a part of a pattern, then provide the reliable sources saying so and add it to our article. [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 00:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
:::Thank you for making an argument. However, a single source can say many things. If the contention is that this fact is related, it should be stated as such in the article and attributed to the source or Maher. As these are not exactly scholarly sources, I would be wary of enshrining such a connection in this article. One source is literally a celebrity gossip website. Need every assertion be included when it is clearly stated the case against Maher was dropped? [[Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:D5DF:F7E0:4C39:EFB:622D:7210|2607:FEA8:D5DF:F7E0:4C39:EFB:622D:7210]] ([[User talk:2607:FEA8:D5DF:F7E0:4C39:EFB:622D:7210|talk]]) 01:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
::::You are asking the wrong person. There are several reliable sources which convey that Johnsen's past relationships are related to her brief relationship with Maher. It is the sources, not me, which convey the information as related -- so you need to be making your argument with the reporting sources, not me. In addition to those sources, Maher himself also mentions her past in his legal response to her claims (and he includes newspaper clippings about her past court attempts, see: [http://www.courthousenews.com/blogarchive/Blog%20Archive%20PDF%20Files/maher1.PDF court filing]), so it is an integral part of Maher's legal response and was considered by the judge. So the Zayden affair will certainly be mentioned in this article if the Johnsen lawsuit is mentioned at all. We should be careful not to state as an assertion of fact that her Zayden allegations and her Maher allegations are part of a pattern - unless reliable sources convey exactly that. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 01:51, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
== [[Sam Harris]] and [[Bill Maher]] categories ==
Hi, you reverted my category edits to [[Sam Harris]] and [[Bill Maher]] (I changed [[:Category:Critics of religions]] to [[:Category:Critics of Islam]] and [[:Category:Critics of Christianity]]) to broaden the categories -- but [[:Category:Critics of religions]] is a parent category of both these categories, so I felt these were more appropriate categories to use. --[[User:Jatkins|Jatkins]] <sup>([[User talk:Jatkins|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jatkins|contribs]])</sup> 19:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
:Hi, Jatkins. Maher and Harris criticize many religions, too many to list, and are indeed notable as "critics of religion" - not just one or two specific religions. "Critics of religions" is the appropriate cat. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 19:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)' |
New page wikitext, after the edit (new_wikitext) | '{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Controversial}}
{{Calm}}
{{Not a forum}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes
|class=B
|a&e-priority=Mid
|a&e-work-group=yes
|listas=Maher, Bill
}}
{{WikiProject Religion|class=B|importance=mid|Interfaith=yes|InterfaithImp=}}
{{WikiProject Comedy|bio=yes|class=B|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Libertarianism|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Atheism|class=B|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject New York|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=B|importance=mid}}
}}
<!-- please do not remove this tag -->
{{Auto archiving notice|small=no
|age=45
|index=./Archive index
|bot=MiszaBot I}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:Bill Maher/Archive index
|mask=Talk:Bill Maher/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 125K
|counter = 5
|minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(45d)
|archive = Talk:Bill Maher/Archive %(counter)d
}}
== Dealing vs Selling ==
[[User:Xenophrenic]] please stop saying "per cited sources" when there is ''one'' source (singular). And please state what your objection to the phrase "dealing marijuana" really is. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 17:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
:"Selling" is more succinct, with fewer connotations. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 18:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
::Firstly, how is "selling" more succinct than "dealing"? "Dealing" denotes "buying and then selling at a profit", which is precisely accurate, conveying the facts succinctly. This is why ones says "dealing marijuana" rather than "buying marijuana and then selling it at a profit". Secondly, you do not state what you mean by "connotations". The only "connotation" I can think of is that of "buying and selling at a profit". Naturally one could wish that dealers would always sell things "at cost" but the profit motive is fairly universal (or at least, very common), not what people would generally call a "connotation". (The word "dealing" applies to a broad range of things, furntiture, antiques, drugs, etc.) [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 18:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
::However, "buying and selling at a profit" is the ''meaning'' of the word, not a "connotation". Perhaps you mean the possible connotation of dealing illegal drugs, such as marijuana? Obviously, that can't be it, either. Please explain here what connotation is worrying you. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 22:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Skipping past the commentary, and answering your questions: "Selling" is more succinct than "dealing", which has many more variations in usage and meaning. As for "Perhaps you mean the possible connotation of dealing illegal drugs, such as marijuana?" No, I meant what I said: "Selling" is more succinct, with fewer connotations. I've removed the personal interpretations and returned the referenced wording. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 19:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::I see you are trying to edit-war your personal interpretation into the article. I've removed it, and returned the reliably sourced information. Your edit summary says "he has said this on many occasions", which may or may not be true, but certainly isn't conveyed by the cited source. [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 19:16, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::::Ignoring my "commentary" or, reasonable request for you to explain your objection, is not a [[WP:ABF|good faith]] response. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::::I didn't ignore your commentary; I read it, and didn't see where there is anything in the commentary that required a response. Meanwhile, I've already explained my objections to your edits. Perhaps if you could explain how your proposed edits would improve the article? [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::::It is funny that a Wikipedia article categorised as a "libertarianism article" is being [[WP:EW|desperately]] [[WP:OWN|sanitised]] of a reliably sourced and totally uncontroversial mention of [[drug dealing|dealing cannabis]]. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:51, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, like that happened. "Funny." [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
==="Dealing cannabis" versus "selling pot"===
Can the article state that "Maher has said that he supported himself financially in college by dealing cannabis", given that it is not disputed that he has frequently said that he did, and there is a source in the article confirming that? ([[User:Xenophrenic]] says not.) [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:Incorrect. It is presently unsourced that he said that. The source has Maher saying: "selling pot allowed me to get through college and make enough money to start off in comedy", which is what our Wikipedia article also accurately says. According to your [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bill_Maher&diff=687626152&oldid=687625485 edits], you decided to change "selling" to "dealing", after giving your personal opinion that {{xt|"Dealing" denotes "buying and then selling at a profit"}}. Seriously? Did it say that in the cited source, right before where he said he grew his own and sold it? Then you wiki-linked "dealing" to the [[Illegal drug trade]] article. Clever. Could you please explain what improvement you are proposing, because I know what it looks like... [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::{{!xt|"Seriously? Did it say that in the cited source, right before where '''he said he grew his own and sold it?'''"}} Stop lying. As you know, the reference does not state that, in fact that would be a clearly libellous statement. Do you want to explain why you made it? [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 20:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:::What statement? I asked a question. You aren't making sense. Perhaps if you could explain how your proposed edits would improve the article, that would be a good start. [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 05:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Certainly. I got a bit dramatic there, I think I misunderstood what you were saying.
*Using a direct quote for a non-controversial fact like this is not normal. It is preferable to just state the fact instead. It is more concise, and also avoids giving any misleading impression, for example that that the fact may be debatable, or that he has only made the claim once. Saying "He has said that... he dealt cannabis", as per my edit, also does conveys exactly where the info is coming from in any case. It is just the standard way to state the fact, without beating around the bush so to speak.
*Saying "dealing cannabis" is the regular phraseology in common use, readily understandable and not open to any misinterpretation. Therefore, it should be used as the standard encyclopedic wording. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 06:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
::Thank you for the reasonable response, but it appears we still disagree on a couple points. Conveying uncontroversial or unambiguous facts directly, rather than as a quotation, is fine, but when there is any possibility of ambiguity or the slightest difference in interpretation, we must adhere to the source — that is not only "normal" convention, but required. An attributed direct quote is the surest way to meet that requirement, and it does so without conveying anything "debatable" (you are confusing it with [[scare quotes]]) or anything about how many times he repeated the claim. As you'll note, when you first converted the quotation to a prose statement, I had no objection with that, although I did make a [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bill_Maher&diff=687381083&oldid=687317359 minor change] of your word "dealing" to "selling" to conform to the cited source. The issue was never whether to convey the information as a quotation or as a prose statement. Then you again replaced the sourced word "selling" with your preferred unsourced word "dealing". Repeatedly. And you argued above (unconvincingly, in my opinion) that we should use your wording rather than the sourced wording. You obviously feel there is a significant difference between your word and the sourced word, otherwise you would not have so vigorously edit-warred to replace what Maher said with what you want to say. And you are correct; there are indeed differences between "selling" and "dealing", in both meaning and perception — which is why we should stick to what he actually said. Perhaps you missed [http://sspw.dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/sspw/pdf/mslesson.pdf Lesson 2]? In many states, there is a legal difference between selling, trafficking, dealing and distributing. Even in your personal definitions given above, you say ''"Dealing" denotes "buying and then selling at a profit"''; okay, so perhaps he was both selling and dealing. Whether he was growing it and selling it, or buying and reselling, or harvesting it from the (very common in the 70s) urban vacant lots in his neighborhood and selling it, he doesn't say. Let's avoid inserting our own extended interpretations of what Maher said, shall we? Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 17:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Of course there's a difference between the words selling and dealing. He was dealing, as he made %100 perfectly clear when he spoke about it on his show, earlier this season. Cultivation is actually a more serious offense, and of course requires more effort and resources to produce commercial quantities. "Harvesting from urban vacant lots" sounds like an urban myth - sure maybe it happened infrequently, but anyway that's not what he did. Unfortunately, a quick google search doesn't produce any RS repeating what he said on his tv show, which I guess would be required, if your objection is that you deliberately want to allow for the possibility that he may have been given the stuff by a [[The_Fabulous_Furry_Freak_Brothers#Characters|hippy cousin]], or whatever. I agree that the quote does allow that possibility (since dispelled this year on his show, as I said); without a written source, I admit you have a point. It is possible, even, that he deliberately left that vague, previously, out of fear. I wonder. It's also possible of course - or even, likely - that he just made up the whole thing for his image. On balance, I have to agree that leaving the quote in quote marks is best. Thanks for discussing. [[User:Signedzzz|zzz]] ([[User talk:Signedzzz|talk]]) 19:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Bill Maher]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=698332963 my edit]. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110906155003/http://www.intouchweekly.com:80/2011/03/bill_maher.php to http://www.intouchweekly.com/2011/03/bill_maher.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 13:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to {{plural:3|one external link|3 external links}} on [[Bill Maher]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=703887890 my edit]. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111106044244/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#40225161
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121210011702/http://theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=218 to http://www.theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=218
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051108055750/http://www.savvyinsider.com:80/article.php?op=viewArticle&article_ID=305 to http://www.savvyinsider.com/article.php?op=viewArticle&article_ID=305
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 06:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Bill Maher]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=722230680 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090830072642/http://www.tonightshowwithconanobrien.com:80/video/clips/bill-maher-pt2-082409/1149697/? to http://www.tonightshowwithconanobrien.com/video/clips/bill-maher-pt2-082409/1149697/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 19:33, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
== Allegations by Johnsen ==
I would like to remove the following sentence: "Johnsen had previously accused another former boyfriend of rape and kidnapping in 1997, and the charges were later dismissed for lack of evidence."
It is unrelated to the allegations against Maher and clearly establishes bias. Lack of evidence does not prove a pattern one way or the other, and in any case should not be stated in this article (it is already in hers). The fact that no action proceeded against Maher should stand by itself. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.234.125.91|99.234.125.91]] ([[User talk:99.234.125.91#top|talk]]) 13:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Further, if the insinuation is this is part of a pattern it should be stated explicitly and supported. Otherwise this is simply a stated fact meant to imply Johnsen is not to be believed. In any case this is more suited to her article. Why is a case predating their relationship relevant to Bill Maher? [[Special:Contributions/99.234.122.127|99.234.122.127]] ([[User talk:99.234.122.127|talk]]) 03:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
::Reliable sources detailing Johnsen's allegations against Maher also detail her past allegations against others. So yeah, they are related according to reliable sources. You are correct that lack of evidence doesn't prove a pattern one way or another, which is why our article doesn't say there is a pattern. Wikipedia conveys what reliable sources say. If you want to add that it is a part of a pattern, then provide the reliable sources saying so and add it to our article. [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 00:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
:::Thank you for making an argument. However, a single source can say many things. If the contention is that this fact is related, it should be stated as such in the article and attributed to the source or Maher. As these are not exactly scholarly sources, I would be wary of enshrining such a connection in this article. One source is literally a celebrity gossip website. Need every assertion be included when it is clearly stated the case against Maher was dropped? [[Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:D5DF:F7E0:4C39:EFB:622D:7210|2607:FEA8:D5DF:F7E0:4C39:EFB:622D:7210]] ([[User talk:2607:FEA8:D5DF:F7E0:4C39:EFB:622D:7210|talk]]) 01:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
::::You are asking the wrong person. There are several reliable sources which convey that Johnsen's past relationships are related to her brief relationship with Maher. It is the sources, not me, which convey the information as related -- so you need to be making your argument with the reporting sources, not me. In addition to those sources, Maher himself also mentions her past in his legal response to her claims (and he includes newspaper clippings about her past court attempts, see: [http://www.courthousenews.com/blogarchive/Blog%20Archive%20PDF%20Files/maher1.PDF court filing]), so it is an integral part of Maher's legal response and was considered by the judge. So the Zayden affair will certainly be mentioned in this article if the Johnsen lawsuit is mentioned at all. We should be careful not to state as an assertion of fact that her Zayden allegations and her Maher allegations are part of a pattern - unless reliable sources convey exactly that. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 01:51, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
== [[Sam Harris]] and [[Bill Maher]] categories ==
Hi, you reverted my category edits to [[Sam Harris]] and [[Bill Maher]] (I changed [[:Category:Critics of religions]] to [[:Category:Critics of Islam]] and [[:Category:Critics of Christianity]]) to broaden the categories -- but [[:Category:Critics of religions]] is a parent category of both these categories, so I felt these were more appropriate categories to use. --[[User:Jatkins|Jatkins]] <sup>([[User talk:Jatkins|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Jatkins|contribs]])</sup> 19:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
:Hi, Jatkins. Maher and Harris criticize many religions, too many to list, and are indeed notable as "critics of religion" - not just one or two specific religions. "Critics of religions" is the appropriate cat. Regards, [[User:Xenophrenic|Xenophrenic]] ([[User talk:Xenophrenic|talk]]) 19:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
7} Atheist, apatheist agnostic,...and deist.
There was a time when Maher refered to himself as and espoused Deist beliefs. That should be added to the article.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYW2xXxFVtU
The above is but one example. There are a few other examples, that I'm having difficult tracking down, but remember, from the 90's/early 2000's where he actually used the label 'deist".
Then in mid-2000's he moved towards agnostic than apatheist and then later in the 2000's he took on "atheist' as his label/belief' |
