This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rush Limbaugh article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Warning: active arbitration remedies
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.
Rush Limbaugh was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles
This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. 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.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Because someone put pornography on the page. In case he has another sock account up his sleave with enough edits/experience, this keeps him from repeating the stunt. I support this for now, at least until the view counts go down and the payoff for vandalism is reduced.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 02:05, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with [[[Epiphyllumlover]], leaving the page non-editable is a good idea for now given the recent attention to the article given his recent death. Other articles of well know persons (especially those with controversy) seem to have a lot of vandalism immediately after a major event dealing with the individual. Jurisdicta (talk) 05:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The page is not "non editable". It can be edited freely by any editor in good standing with an account at least 30 days old and with at least 500 edits. Other editors can submit edit requests. The reason is that the article has been subject to horrific and pornographic vandalism, and this protection level is intended to prevent such vandalism. Cullen328Let's discuss it05:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the article should be temporarily blocked from view completely, then.
Seems like no information at all would be better than misinformation.
Because there isn't one. He was qualified 1-Y and then 4F for a legitimate (if minor) physical condition. Anyone who says otherwise, has a POV axe to grind. As someone who works in the USAF, I've seen people be marked "undeployable" for having bad teeth - as such there are MANY medical reasons which would preclude someone in 1970 with 1970 medicine from being drafted. Ckruschke (talk) 19:00, 23 April 2021 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]
Presidential Medal of Freedom
An editor has made it their personal mission to "add context" to every Presidential Medal of Freedom awarded by Trump by making sure every mention includes Trump, even in the infobox. I have not found a single example of the awarding president being shown in the infobox prior to these changes. Any thoughts? –CWenger (^ • @) 19:39, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this is not needed in the infobox. This is not done for other recipients who received it from other administrations. And the editors argument that this is for context given that Trump awarded the fewest medals doesn't work for me, since a similar note had not been used for whatever administration previously held this distinction. If how or to whom Trump awarded the medal was notable, I would still argue that it does not belong in the infobox, as noted in similar discussions at Talk:Mariano_Rivera#Trump_Historical_Context_Removed and Talk:Jerry_West#Trump_Historical_Context_Removed. --FyzixFighter (talk) 22:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also believe we should treat all medal-holders equally and there is no need to list the awarding president unless we do it for all. I find the fewest medals rationale unconvincing.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:33, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The sources used for this article come almost entirely from places like Huffington Post or Media Matters, who are unapologetically pro-DNC\critics of Limbaugh. Franken's book, for example, was rife with inaccuracies but that is not mentioned here either. Claims by Limbaugh's critics are treated as unimpeachable and not examined for accuracy. 2601:C2:680:31B0:12B:7077:890E:5507 (talk) 01:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the 