Talk:Barack Obama on social media

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Barack Obama on social media was one of the Social sciences and society 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.

Condensing info about Twitter use?[edit]

Statistics? At least there are some good information. However, I cannot tell which is necessary or not. But is the comparison of the Stephen Fry account relevant, necessary, or something? At least there are "Hacking" and "Significance" sections. Thank god the atrocious trivial Kanye West thing was removed. --George Ho (talk) 16:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That was all me, honestly it is just such a painfully boring read it takes me a while but it works out since even removing one superfluous tweet from the article has elicited warring before I think a slow editorial pace would most benefit the article. I believe there are simply too many statistics here, it's one thing if they are cited as attributing to his success or the passage of a law etc but if it's just a data mine we need to condense to truly noteworthy stats and I feel what looks like two whole medium sized multi paragraph sections need to be condensed into just one half the size or less.LuciferWildCat (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Somehow I'm less than confident in allowing for editorial discretion 'trimming' something you probably still wish was deleted. T'would be less strife if you stuck to adding and improving other sections of the article, and leave the twitter things, which were there when the article passed the GAC, for the talk page to work out. Darryl from Mars (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Darryl, what is so special about removed content? How is Kanye West situation worthy of inclusion, as well as history of statistics? --George Ho (talk) 07:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Look, for example, how when I first made that removal, concerning Kanye, I brought it to the talk page in case others wanted to comment. TOny disagreed and put it back. Others commented, we tried different things; we never had to worry about edit warring. That's the model I want to encourage you, and particularly LWC, to use when removing content from the Twitter section. It makes it easier to have the discussion if someone disagrees with an edit. You certainly wouldn't suggest no one ever disagrees with with LWC, would you? Darryl from Mars (talk) 15:19, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Get off your soapbox. This section is about condensing twitter use. Do you have an opinion in favor or against or in neutrality to this?LuciferWildCat (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Your cuts are facially appropriate, but go too far, leaving ambiguous statements behind, you also seem to have left 'citation needed' tags in places where there was a citation that you removed. Darryl from Mars (talk) 22:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
The link in my recent edit comment is malformed; is the diff you want. Darryl from Mars (talk) 22:24, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Everyone in #Controversies and mishaps favors trimming/removing the Kanye content down. --George Ho (talk) 19:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Tony is Tony, okay? Look, merits of arguments are all that matters, and Tony's comments doesn't hold much as water as Lucifer's. --George Ho (talk) 18:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it was my idea, remember? The point is that the opportunity to make comments was given. Do you understand what I'm asking of you? Darryl from Mars (talk) 22:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Obama on Blackberry[edit]

I have found results of Obama's Blackberry use. I am unsure if it is part of social media; if not, then I will be proposing a re-broadening of this article's scope again. --George Ho (talk) 18:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I fail to understand what this has got to do with social media. At best, one could argue it is tangentially related in that Obama might use his Blackberry to connect with social media, but the device he uses seems hardly significant. We know he uses his Blackberry for email, but I am unaware of any reliable source that says he uses it for social media. Indeed, he might also carry an iPhone or Android device specifically for that purpose. Or maybe he borrows one from someone else. Or maybe he uses a PC or a Mac. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
First of all, I see that Google exists, but what information has actually been found? Darryl from Mars (talk) 13:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

What's significant is that Obama was embraced several new media which is why I had originally proposed that it be named Communications of Barack Obama, Blackberry is a new medium not available before these previous two elections on a widespread basis. There is broad consensus to expand this topic beyond twitter and adding a section on Blackberry follows the spirit of that consensus in addition to the plurality that supported communications or public relations in general and even cited Blackberry.LuciferWildCat (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't make any sort of sense at all. There's no evidence to suggest Obama uses his Blackberry to engage with social media. The article should focus on the social media services, not devices. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Why? When we can expand it and make it more comprehensive and put all this new technology into description for posterity? Don't be such a Luddite.LuciferWildCat (talk) 21:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This article is about social media, not devices. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
It is about devices, because devices are used to use and promote and expand and create social media. That is a false dichotomy amounting to we can only speak about an artists music not the CDs MP3s iTunes sales and other highly interrelated variables pssst.Chiquitiqua (talk) 23:23, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


Here is a new one for ya'all: --v/r - TP 15:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree that Obama's use of Reddit is a logical expansion of this article. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)