Talk:Abby Martin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Draft talk:Abby Martin)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Breaking the Set[edit]

Due to recent announcements by Martin, I have added an end date to the show. Viriditas (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

merge Breaking the Set[edit]

  • Support the merge. the only content mentioning the show is all focused on Martin's rant. The show itself fails to have any significant coverage as required by WP:GNG
  • There is no reason for the tags and the discussion. The article should have been merged a long time ago but we had relative newbies refusing to do so. I'm going to remove the tags and redirect as I don't see any content worth merging. If someone does, it's in the page history. But in the future, please don't tag articles that are under a GAN. Viriditas (talk) 19:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Abby Martin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CookieMonster755 (talk · contribs) 21:31, 12 April 2015 (UTC)


Symbol support vote.svg
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct. The article is clear and concise. No spelling and grammar errors that I've noticed.
1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. The article mostly complies with MoS, but I am concerned about the list incorporation. GA criteria says it needs to comply with list incorporation, but the section Abby Martin#Selected work may not comply with list incorporation. The "Selected work" section is a list, not a prose. However, MoS guidelines say: Prose is preferred in articles as prose allows the presentation of detail and clarification of context. I than read further down the page to find Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists#Lists of works and timelines. It says that bulled list for works of a living person is usually formatted in the list, but the context of the list must be mentioned somewhere else in the article. After reading that, I decided 1b passed.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Overall sources are reliable, but I do see one source to a YouTube channel description, about her show. The sentence that goes with the source says: and as a show that "cuts through the false Left/Right paradigm set by the establishment & reports the hard facts." although Wikipedia discourages YouTube as a source, I think for this sentence it's alright, since it's quoting something from the YouTube channel's description. However, I would recommend finding an official site to use as a reference instead of a YouTube channel.
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
2c. it contains no original research. Not as far as I can tell.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. No edit wars recently, but a few reverts in the past 3 months, but nothing to due with edit wars.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content. Free image, perfect!
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. No other images are in the article, so no captions are needed.
7. Overall assessment. This article overall passes the 6 good criteria for a Good article.

CookieMonster755 (talk) 22:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)


Speech[edit]

She spoke at Z-Day ref Jonpatterns (talk) 14:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Comparison[edit]

Fox News compared her with Pat Buchanan, Peter Hitchens, Gerald Warner, and William Lind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.227.69.243 (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Abby Martin. 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:

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

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:38, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

November 16 2016[edit]

Someone removed this from Reception:

Journalist Nik Afanasjew of Der Tagesspiegel said Martin "looks like a model and acts like a punk".[1]

Not only do I like it, but I think she and most of her audience would like it too. Her critics would probably agree. I don't see the problem. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 17:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ ". . . die wie ein Modell aussieht, sich wie ein Punk benimmt " Afanasjew, Nik. (December 7, 2013). Putins Massenmedienwaffe. Der Tagesspiegel. Retrieved January 15, 2014.

Replacing Media Roots podcast references[edit]

There are two citations that reference an unavailable podcast to show the date Martin moved to Washington DC. I found an interview that states she moved in 2012 (not 2010). Replacing references & date accordinginly. – gwendy (talk) 15:54, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Added Abby Martin vs Wikipedia[edit]

Abby Martin vs Wikipedia. Moscowamerican (talk) 03:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)