Talk:David Horowitz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Communism etc[edit]

I removed the reference to his parents' Communist Party membership from the introduction, but was reverted by Rms125a@hotmail.com who thinks this is "incredibly important". I don't agree. It's important enough to be mentioned in the article, but a whole sentence in the introduction is unnecessary. They left the party when he was 17. They probably did influence him, but many people joined the New Left without having Communist parents. This undue emphasis is mirrored in the body of the article. There is more information about his parents than his career as a leftist. It's as if his leftist period was foisted on him by his parents.

I also don't the leftist period should be buried in the third paragraph of the introduction. It is one of the things he is famous for.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

His parents' ideological orientation is elemental to understanding Horowitz and their own subversive behavior is sufficiently extreme so as to merit mention in its own right. There is nothing UNDUE here.
"It's as if his leftist period was foisted on him by his parents" -- I agree it probably was although this is SYNTHESIS.
Anybody else out there have an opinion? Quis separabit? 22:55, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
He was still a leftist in his 30s, writing a biography of Isaac Deutscher. I don't think you can put that all on his parents, particularly as they left the CP when he was a kid. I agree their membership should be mentioned in the article, but not in the introduction. I'm not sure what you mean by subversive behaviour. The introduction talks about in the Great Depression, which was before he was born. This really is undue weight. There were many people radicalised in the 1960s and 70s. But Not Everybody's Lucky Enough to Have Communist Parents. Though many are. We don't mention this in the introduction of articles about a great many people, for example: actor Daniel Day-Lewis, British comedian Alexei Sayle, or Australian politician Lee Rhiannon.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:26, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

His parents' ideological orientation is elemental to understanding Horowitz and their own subversive behavior is sufficiently extreme so as to merit mention in its own right. There is nothing UNDUE here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.232.60 (talk) 07:52, 28 September 2017

"Subversive behavior," ha ha. Communism is a ideology, for goodness sake. We're neither the thought police nor McCarhyists, here to highlight BLPs' parents' "subversive" beliefs. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Horowitz. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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) 01:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Writing on the Right[edit]

Why has my edit in Writing on the Right been removed two times. There must be a mention of the Black Book as his current work on the series is there reason that he writes essays so seldom. Also footnote 20 says "The Black Book of the American Left, p. 155". Wrong. The The Black Book of the American Left is a multivolume set. Which volume is being referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.201.40 (talk) 05:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I can't answer the first question, but as to the second, just because something is verifiable doesn't mean it belongs in Wikipedia. When it comes to biographies of writers and such, we need to be careful to only include works that have some independent indicia of noteworthiness; otherwise, such articles often end up reading like bibliographies with obscure, non-noteworthy works. Even worse is when non-noteworthy works that haven't even been published get included; that can make the article content read as promotional. In due time, Horowitz's upcoming book may be published and reviewed or otherwise make the news, at which point adding it to his biography would become appropriate. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits by Truth Not Fiction[edit]

Hi Truth Not Fiction, please do not edit war; rather, discuss any content disputes here. I have reverted your additions of extended quotes/viewpoint content about Horowitz because of the undue weight you gave to non-independent and self-serving sources.

  • Part of what you added was an unnecessarily long quotation of Horowitz himself. We don't want to suppress Horowitz's own views, but we need to trim them down to the most pertinent and encyclopedic points to avoid turning our article into his soapbox.
  • The other part of what you added reads as a rebuttal by the Thernstroms against independent criticism--but the problem is that the rebuttal was pulled out of context (it was about his book, not about Horowitz himself) and did not disclose that the Ternstroms actually wrote the preface to the book, so they are hardly independent.

--Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:32, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Horowitz. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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) 03:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)