Talk:Imus in the Morning

• References to Don Imus or other persons appearing on the Imus in the Morning Show must comply with Unsourced statements about living persons, or they will be Speedy Deleted

comment

Could someone please tell me why we even care what the "black community" has to say? They, meaning the black community are one of the most racist groups around... for example NAACP as far as I know The NAAWP would be White suppremist and a racist organization whats the difference? Jet Magazine cleary a racially segregating magazine Miss Black America Miss White America I don't think so. BET- Black Entertainment Television WET white entertainment television I don't think so. The Essence Awards-Racially segregating. Imus didn't make up the word Knappy the black community did just like the word ashy to describe dry black skin..

I could go on and on

4/11/07 Can someone change the obviously wrong dates in the following sentence to the correct ones?...Is it supposed to read March, not April - I don't know who posted this: "The show has been broadcast every morning for 25 years (11 years on television), except for a two-week period from April 16, 2007 to April 20, 2007, and again from April 23, 2007 to April 27, 2007 wherein Imus was suspended for making racist and sexist remarks about the Rutgers University women's basketball team the preceding week."

affiliates?

are you listening on WFAN? i'm pretty sure that here in the tri-state the FAN broadcast always ends with one of the characters' voices (bill clinton, jack nicholson, etc) saying "copyright 2006, CBS radio. imus in the morning is a presentation of WFAN and westwood one entertainment."

i'm thinking that it was your particular affiliate that would have this ending.

I listen to wfan.com streaming audio, and I haven't heard that. 24.13.86.24 03:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Questionable fact changes

On 20 April, 216.220.241.25 made multiple fact changes, all of which seemed to heighten Imus' stature. Are there any verifications of these changes? Perhaps they should be reverted entirely; I'm not knowledgeable enough to decide. CalebNoble 08:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The sources provided in the article contradict the above edits. Therefore, I have reverted them. Accurizer 16:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Characters

Can we have a list of all recurring characters? My favorite is Blind Mississippi White Boy Pig Face Dapris [not sure on spelling]. It's understandable most Knappy headed folk know it's spelled "shonuf" not "sure"24.13.86.24 03:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Controversies

This is covered in greater detail in the main article, Don Imus, so I've added a "see also" notation. Not sure if there's a better way to handle this, as there already seems to be a lot of overlap between the two articles. Maybe someone has a better idea? JGHowes ^talk - 15:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Change "is" to "was" in the first paragraph

Since Imus is no longer on MSNBC. It should be changed from "is" to "was" in the first paragraph.--168.13.191.66 15:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Headings

"Importance of show", "End of an era", are these really neutral headings? They seem to have been written by someone who favored the show. - Throw 21:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protection

i think this should get semi-protection for at least the next 24 hours because of the level of vandalism and linkspam seen recently that will only increase as the news spreads. if you agree, you can add it to the list at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection Riphamilton 22:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

How many years?

First paragraph says 25 years, fourth paragraph says it started in 1979, for 27 1/2 years. Simon12 03:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Move to satellite radio?

Citations needed for the lenght of the contract (the articles listed jsut say 5 years, but don't say when it was signed. Additionally his contract has not been terminated. His show has been canceled. DocGratis 17:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

cancellation section

The section of this article about the cancellation is too POV. According to this piece, Imus made a little mistake, apologized for it, and it was Sharpton and Jackson who got him fired. Almost nothing about any public or press calls for his resignation or removal. And the way the chronology is presented, it appears (although doesn't quite say) that he met with the team and even they accepted his apology but then he was fired because of loss of sponsorship. Which is not what happened. Finally, according to this article, all of the reaction to the cancellation was in favor of Imus. That's not what I've been hearing. Some, yes, but hardly all. I'm putting a POV tag on the section - this needs work. Tvoz |talk 03:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Strongly agree with Tvoz, Much work is need with citations for opinion and general POV issues. I adjusted the apology section, in an attempt for more citation, better NPOV, and more accurate timeline. After this event cools off the sections from this and the Don Imus article will be unified. And this section is going to be dismantled without serious work. DocGratis 04:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• i don't think threats to "dismantle" are going to be well received. The section is now re-written with (hopefully) a more balanced tone. Virtually every statement is sourced. JGHowes ^talk - 04:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've done some more work to better elaborate on the outrage sparked by Imus's slur, by adding more cited sources. Please look it over to see if you agree the POV tag could come off JGHowes ^talk - 12:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Relevance of Bo's opinions?

Seeing as Bo Dietl is a singular person of minor fame, is his opinion about the situation of any real value to the article?<spetz>.72.76.248.151 23:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, since his interview was televised nationally and reported in the Los Angeles Times. He is notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia (see Richard Dietl) and, according to the LA Times article, he is speaking for the "many" Imus fans. Because this is a controversial issue, both sides need to be presented for NPOV, regardless of whether we personally agree with him or not JGHowes ^talk - 05:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

According to Dietl's Wikipedia page, the most famous thing he's don has been being a guest on Imus' show. Yeah, I think his opinion's ignorant, mildly retarded, and more than slightly racist, I admit; but I don't think that's affecting my judgment on this. I mean, it's certainly showing my sensitivities, because I really do think that argument skirts the issue with Imus.

But I do feel, at the very least, that the wording of the entry makes it seem like Dietl's more the focus than the opinion, and I think that's wrong. Actually, any hesitation I have with changing it is because I know it's a real widely-held opinion. I think the wording should at least be changed to reflect the popularity of the opinion, rather than demonstrate the strength or popularity of the opinion as demonstrated by such a major personality as Mr. Dietl.

<spetz>.216.175.188.98 16:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

bush supporter? source?

is there a source for the claims made here?

In 2000, Imus was a George W. Bush supporter; however, after the Iraq War, Imus became more critical of Bush and supported John Kerry in 2004. (He later said he regretted the decision.)

i think these are distinct statements and if they are factual, it should be possible to provide a source for them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.167.240.157 (talk) 03:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

• Good point. I don't know what the source might be - perhaps the editor who added that can cite it? Imus did frequently say so on his show, but that would be WP:OR. I guess you could tag it {{cn}} or be WP:BOLD and delete it JGHowes ^talk - 14:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• • alright, will do. frankly it's an akward inclusion in that section to begin with.67.167.240.157 15:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • just to get it off my desktop, the unsourced information made it into the article innocenty enough. it was originally included in a large expansion last feb.
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Imus_in_the_Morning&diff=next&oldid=39164273
  • this included a more complete reconing of imus' political disposition, mentioning his support for the clinton administration. because it mentioned his bad showing at the radio and television dinner within the paragraph, it was moved to the new "controversies" section. then someone noticed the language mentioning that incident in that part of the paragraph was a little informal and unmathematic and cleaned it up.
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Imus_in_the_Morning&diff=next&oldid=119109074
  • this unfortunately made the text appear biassed in light of the recent controversy. i think the edit i made clears it up because his political disposition either way is trivia unrelated to the material covered in the article.67.167.240.157 04:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)