Jump to content

Talk:Jeffrey Goldberg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 23.242.135.196 (talk) at 03:36, 20 May 2016 (→Glenn Creenwald in Header). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Prominent Jewish American

Per WP:MOSBIO, opening paragraph, section 3, I have removed Goldberg's ethnicity in the header, does anybody object to this? He is listed under a Jewish category. Also, this material should go under early life/family background. Any concerns, questions, comments ect? Thanks, --Tom 20:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to its removal, given the category listing. Removal of such descriptions occurs in Wikipedia header paragraphs. --NYScholar 23:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I am coming off a 1 month block so I am just trying to keep everything kosher as it were :). Thanks --Tom 13:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV?

Explanation of tag: See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. This article appears to be relying too much on the subject's own website for information about him. It needs greater variety of reliable sources. See WP:BLP with link to WP:Reliable sources. Such articles are not to be advertisements for their subjects. --NYScholar 23:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with NYsholar 100%, at the very least this article should have a 'criticism' section attached to it. The article already describes how Goldberg was an apologist for the 2003 Iraq invasion, of which all justifications were proven false, hence proving that he didn't do his job as a journalist very well. Further, he rationalizes this by calling Saddam: '"uniquely evil" and advocated an invasion on a moral basis'. Nevermind that would be against international and domestic law. Not having a criticism section results in an article that appears to be an advertisement for Goldberg. 76.118.73.82 (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Serious questions about neutrality

I have several concerns about the neutrality of this article. In general, the extensive reliance on and citation of quotations from Goldberg's liberal critics seems to violate the NPOV policy--specifically the fairness of tone guideline. (It also gives the overwhelming impression that Goldberg is a conservative journalist--why not cite the Progressive naming his book one of the best of '06, his recent criticism of Wal-Mart, etc.) As for specific issues...

The charge that his articles, "some critics say, reiterated the government line in maintaining ties between the September 11 attacks and Saddam Hussein's Iraq" seem to violate rules on attribution and substantiation. (Also, actually read "The Great Terror"--the charge itself, even if it can be attributed, seems untrue.)

This sentence seems problematic to me: "'The Great Terror' has been criticized, however, as putting undue weight on the claim that Saddam Hussein gassed Kurds in Halabja, as opposed to Iran." Wikipedia's own page on Halabja concludes Iraq was responsible. I think this should be deleted.

Is the section "Review of Jimmy Carter's book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid" worth including? It seems trivial in the context of Goldberg's entire career. I would flag this as undue weight.

Mlpotter 04:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His review of Jimmy Carter's book should certainly be included. He suggested that the former president of the United States is a bigot. I quote "the former president's hostility to Israel is, to borrow a term, faith-based." So yes its extremely notable. I can't imagine why anyone thought it wasn't. While we are at it, some mention needs to be made of his recent interview with Castro where he claimed Castro had renounced his economic philosophy, which of course Castro denies 24.207.131.20 (talk) 18:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opening sentence

I feel quite uncomfortable witrh the opening sentence as it currently stands, Jeffrey Mark Goldberg (born September, 1965) is a former Israeli Defense Forces prison guard and an American-Israeli[1] journalist. While this is factually true and nothing to be ashamed of, it feels like some people would want to put the zionist=racist blame on him right from the opening words. I didn't check, but i don't think the article on Mahmoud Abbas opens with "...is a PhD holder in Holocaust denial ([1]) and the current president of the Palestinian Fatah party".--RCS (talk) 10:51, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Make the changes and place that author information in the bio section.ShamWow (talk) 18:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you agree? It tells of his current and former job titles, exactly the same thing it says when you go to Abbas's page. Or nayone else's page. Calling Abbas a holocaust denier in his opening sentence would be like saying Goldberg known for favoring violent aggression against various muslim majority nations, in his opening sentence, which of course is not the case here 24.207.131.20 (talk) 18:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

American-Israeli?

The intro labels Goldberg as American-Israeli. Can anyone confirm, and better yet provide citation, that he is Israeli? My non-exhaustive search doesn't turn up any website but Wikipedia making this statement. I'm aware he served in the IDF, but afaik that doesn't necessarily make him Israeli, nor does living for a time in Israel. Without a decent cite, I'm thinking this should go. --CAVincent (talk) 00:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, was able to answer my question. Here he refers to himself as "American-Israeli" and discusses voting in Israeli elections. --CAVincent (talk) 02:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This should be made more clear. Like other American-Israelis, Wikipedia's standard is to include their name in Hebrew. See Michael Oren, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oren — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.91.136 (talk) 17:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Creenwald in Header

Wondering whether the Greenwald quote belongs in the header. What does it contribute? I don't see Goldberg's jabs at Greenwald in Greenwald's header. What I'm really saying: these two have a weird history of back-and-forth articles full of veiled (and not-so-veiled) insults and criticisms. See:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/01/a-question-from-glenn-greenwald-updated/251705/2/ http://www.salon.com/2010/08/13/past_2/ http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/01/more-on-glenn-greenwald-israel-firsters-and-idiot-editors-updated/251852/2/ http://www.salon.com/2010/06/27/goldberg_7/

and so on... By all means, the criticism should be included in the article, but I am not so sure that Glen Greenwald is the right person to be quoted in the header of this encyclopaedic article, seeing as he appears to be out on a bit of a professional vendetta against the subject. Thoughts? --76.179.237.21 (talk) 23:16, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'm moving it to the Iraq section. --108.28.191.79 (talk) 19:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a general rule (since this question is long settled here) the subject of a bio should never be attacked in the lede. Even articles about the likes of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot, and their ilk, don't leap straight into their awfulness, but start out by explaining why they were notable before they earned their infamy, so it can be understood in context. To leap straight into criticism of someone who is not in the running for the title of History's Greatest Monster, but at the very worst is thought by some to not be very good at their job, stinks of someone trying to skew the article to push a negative POV from the outset. The one or two times I've seen it, it stank of obvious vandalism. 23.242.135.196 (talk) 03:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Political Views

Thanks to the editor(s) who included this section. In contrast to many Wikipedia articles, with this article, I was able to go directly to that section and find out what I needed to know. ---Dagme (talk) 01:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jeffrey Goldberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

  • Corrected formatting/usage for //www.newyorker.com/main/contributors/contribs_gk?contribs_gk

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jeffrey Goldberg/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
The author seems to misconstrue Howard Kurtz' references to the ponies for the children--Kurtz never said Bradley gave the ponies to the children, but instead seemed to indicate Bradley brought them for a visit. Here are the relevant quotations:

Bradley, the magazine's owner, wrote flattering letters. He courted Goldberg at a McDonald's on Wisconsin Avenue. He proffered a hefty signing bonus. And when the New Yorker's Washington correspondent finally seemed receptive to making the move, Bradley sent in the ponies.

"He's incredibly persistent and makes you feel like you're God's gift to journalism," says Goldberg, who had turned Bradley down once before. But that was before the horses showed up at his home to entertain his children. "The charm is incredibly disarming," says Goldberg, who joined the Atlantic last month.

As for the ponies, Bradley has a built-in advantage. He was a groom at Meadowbrook Stables in Chevy Chase while growing up and is now one of its chief financial supporters.

In any case, the Kurtz piece [2] should not be used to support the assertion made.

Alansmorrison 21:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 21:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 19:44, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jeffrey_Goldberg&oldid=721163273"