Talk:Drudge Report

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Conservatism (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Florida (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Journalism (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Websites / Computing  (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (marked as Low-importance).
 

Report by CNN of The Drudge Report; #HillaryHealh[edit]

This is in response of the Drudge Report using a photo of Hillary Clinton going up the stairs.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/08/media/drudge-report-hillary-clinton-fall/

Also, in response to the #HillaryHealth Tweets:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/armed-with-junk-science-and-old-photos-critics-question-hillaryshealth/

Where should I place these articles?

Yoshiman6464 (talk) 16:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Probably in Drudge Report#Controversial stories, errors and questions about sourcing. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 18:12, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
This content has been repeatedly removed by the same editor, first with the comment "irrelevant" and second with the comment "The photo was not falsified and hence not a 'false story'". There is no basis for the removal. The content meets all of our policies and guidelines and certainly qualifies under the current heading of "Controversial stories, errors and questions about sourcing." --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 07:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Illegitimate son[edit]

I'm not sure this really is a top-level detail for the Drudge Report, and we should look for BLP sourcing... but if you keep it, do you suppose "illegitimate son" should hyperlink to bastard or son of a whore? :) (actually, much to my dismay, we don't have a good article for the second option yet) Wnt (talk) 15:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2016[edit]


I suggest someone add the part where Drudge claims Walter Isaacson of Time magazine lied to him about the DNA test for Bill Clintons son.

SOURCE: http://www.mediaite.com/online/drudge-doubles-down-on-clinton-love-child-claim-there-was-no-dna-test/


Deanroydavis (talk) 00:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

The "Isaacson lying" story doesn't appear to been picked up by the mainstream media, suggesting that it's not sufficiently noteworthy for inclusion. On the other hand the broader story of Drudge pushing the Clinton love child theory was picked up by The Washington Post, so I'm not against inclusion of that. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2016[edit]


I put in a request a few weeks ago to correct your statement that they put out a false story about bill clintons son. They said they were lied to about the original story by a source from the Times. Fix this or remove it. You're allowing the uninformed to edit articles, it would be better to allow public edits if your standard is to not investigate or update your own information. 2602:306:C469:E5B0:2D10:80A:9A52:D8DE (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I couldn't find a request from a few weeks ago, especially since this is your first edit. What are you talking about? RunnyAmigatalk 20:10, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

You should remove the part about Matt paying the Obamacare fees a year before they were do.[edit]

Small businesses and sole proprietorships are exempt from providing Obamacare to their employees, but not for themselves. As a small business, he would have to declare his own income and pay his taxes quarterly, meaning that he may, in fact, have paid the tax prior to 2015 - along with thousands of others Americans. It might be sort of slimy to include that in your article as a truism, and use as it's citation an article that only claims it's possible he was lying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Btjnark (talkcontribs) 23:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Can you please provide a reliable source or two supporting your contention? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Please modify the bit about Ben Shapiro[edit]

It says, presently, that "Ben Shapiro of townhall.com". It would be less time-bound to say "Ben Shapiro, writing for townhall.com, ..." 173.245.131.67 (talk) 17:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I just removed "of townhall.com" since "... writing for townhall.com, wrote ..." reads awkwardly. Readers can check the footnote to see that he was writing for townhall.com. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)