Talk:Tom Barnard

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Untitled

A previous version of this article was discussed at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Tom Barnard. The article was kept following a rewrite, which solved the most important issues. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:34, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Jeff Passolt

Oddly there are certain things that are being removed regularly that are not exactly favorable to Tom Barnard and other cast members. One person has repeatedly deleted info on the show. The "deleter" has confined his work to Barnard and another Twin Cities local radio personality (Dan Cole). It leads me to think that someone who is close to the people named in the article is "cleaning" things to make the show's cast look better. Oh yeah, Jeff Passolt gave Alan Quist a contribution of $300 when Quist ran for Governor.

Then make an article about Jeff Passolt. Tom Barnard is not responsible for what he does. I think it is you who has the vendetta.

What is being deleted? I glanced through the histroy and didn't see anything worthwhile being deleted but I could have missed it but there is a lot of history to look through. Maybe you should be more specific? Also what does Quist have to do with anything? Sinner6 17:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quist is a rigid conservative, in fact, he lost primaries to the centrist Arne Carlson. The contribution to Quist shows Passolt to be partisan, which conflicts with accepted journaistic standards.

And that has what to do with Bernard?

Nothing, but if people want to edit by including Pawelk's breast size or Crousor's porn fettish, it fits with the rest of the content.

So Jeff Passolt is not allowed to contribute financially, even if he does not publically endorse someone? If he endorsed Mike Hatch this wouldnt even be an issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.225.129.111 (talk • contribs)

I don't think it is worth mentioning. Alan Quist is not a very prominent politician and $300 is not that big of a contribution. Besides, its too specific for a general description of the man. --Ouzo 22:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lets looks at the context of what is being said in the article and what you write. We're allowing descriptions of breast and porn fettishes. A journalist who contributes to a politician is relevant - and certainly adds to the history and journalistic integrity of Passolt. By the way, the contribution is the maximum allowable under MN campain laws. (And how does Hatch get brought into this?) It's not about the party or the politician, it goes to journalistic impartiality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.73.55.10 (talk • contribs) --Crazy Cabbie

If you want it that bad, it's not a big deal to me. I just don't want to see this article look like it's been through an edit war. --Ouzo 21:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is only Jeff Passolt's political contributions an issue here? If it is that important why not make a page about Jeff Passolt. I mention Mike Hatch because he would be applauded by the people who keep putting that line in his biography. Jeff Passolt did not live in the Twin Cities when Alan Quist was running for governor. He left KARE-11 in the spring of 1994, the primary was not until the fall. Do you have a date of when the campaign contribution took place, as well as a citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.21.82 (talk • contribs)

There is no link, but the information is available at the MN Campaign Finance Board (www.cfboard.state.mn.us). Contributions are not online for that far back, so you have to have the donor records pulled for that election reporting cycle. The contribution is listed there, and it was made as Passolt was moving to Colorado. Nobody cares about who a person supports (in general), but it goes to journalistic ethics when an "objective reporter" makes a political contribution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.73.55.10 (talk • contribs)

Then there is no proof that he made the contribution while he was reporting in Minnesota. The only reason you want to keep that there is to give the impression that Passolt is a radical right wing nut, which is not true. Anyone who actually listens to the show or watches Passolt on televsion (the past 25 years) would know this. I wilk keep deleting the contribution because it is made with a vendetta against the KQ Morning show, there is no mention of any other canidacy sponsorships. Bob Sansavere openly voted for Jesse Ventura, but that is not mentioned. If you have no proof of when the donation was made, there is no point of putting it in. I will keep deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.225.129.111 (talk • contribs)

So there is no proof he made the contribution yet your proof for that is 'people who watch him on TV just know'? How do you know he didn't make it? Despite it, however, I'm inclined to agree that until someone finds a reliable source for this info, it should not be in the article. --Ouzo 18:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can I link a non-web based report that I saw with my own two eyes? How about an edit that reflects a contribution while not disclosing the recipient? Again, it's not about who got the contribution, it's about journalistic ethics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.12.112.79 (talk • contribs)

Um, are you 204.73.55.10? I wish people would sign their names so I wouldn't be confused about who's responding. Anyway, an anonymous IP saying they saw it with their own eyes is not sufficient enough. Even a footnote would do. Remember: WP:NOR. --Ouzo 19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday I went and looked at it, I even asked that they put it on their web. They declined... I cleared up the language, and put in a footnote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.71.114 (talk • contribs)

If you want to be critical of Jeff Passolt make a Jeff Passolt page. This page should be strictly for his contribution to the morning show. Jeff Passolt was not appearing on any broadcast in Minnesota during the time of the 1994 Minnesota primaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.12.255 (talk • contribs)

What does the campaign contribution have to do with his on air personality? He does not act as a newsreader on the show, he is there for comedy and opinion of the days events. This piece of information is better suited for the FOX 9 page or a Jeff Passolt page.

The piece on Alan Quist will be deleted everytime I see it. It has no relevence to Passolt's presence on the morning show.

If you love Passolt so much, why don't you marry him?

OH SNAP! --Ouzo 13:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terri Traen's Real Name

Why do people keep taking Terri Traen's real name (Terri Pawelk) out of the article?

Because as a public person she uses the name Traen and her legal name is of no relevence to the discussion.

There has been a lot of reverting over including/excluding Terri Traen's real name Theresa Pawelk. I personally don't have a problem with having her real name in the article (since most biographies always show a person's birth name). But I would like to know why people have been taking it out completely or replacing it with "real name removed out of professional courtesy" (whatever that means) Oh, and people: sign your names with a ~~~~ after you write your comments. --Ouzo 01:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is relevant, most other "celebs" have their real name cited in wiki articles. And taking it out citing professional courtesy makes the article look like it was modified a-la Norm Coleman's (when his own staff scrubbed references to make him look more favorable to his constituents).204.73.55.10 22:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC) Crazy Cabbie[reply]

Mark Rosen

Whoever posts seems to have an anti Tom agenda. Rosen was never forced out. When the show really took off WCCO-TV forced him off of KQ and onto WCCO radio when his contract came up. Barnard actually ripped WCCO through that entire process and lobbied on air to allow Rosen to stay KQ.

Move Info

A suggestion.. This page should be about Tom Barnard and not generally about the KQRS Morning Show. I would suggest that a new page KQRS Morning Show be created to house the information about the show and this page should be about Tom Barnard.--Khoogheem 21:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Pretty much everything below "Other KQRS Morning Show Members" would make more sense being in a separate "KQRS Morning Show" article. Tom Bernard != the Morning Show as a whole.75.73.72.108 03:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Rants

Why does someone keep deleting Tom Barnard's rants against immigration and violence. Is there some citation that can be referenced to "rants against social programs, college professors, and the liberal media". Tom Barnard rants against the abuse of social programs, some media outlets, and college instructors who have been in the news, the way the article is written makes it sound like he is a neo con. (which is the goal of the author). -Namzso

BLP violations

I have removed large swaths of unsourced text from this article. If somebody can provide reliable sources for the claims, please go back and re-add it. Corvus cornix_talk 22:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, this whole article needs to be rewritten to filter out all the fan BS, POVs and unrelated topics. I've been meaning to do this for a while, but have never gotten around to it. --Ouzo (talk) 04:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of KQ Morning Show

I've removed all the other members of the KQ morning show and their bits. The reason is this article should be about Tom Barnard exclusively, NOT the morning show as a whole. You don't see Howard Stern's article about the show itself nor any other radio show's host. I was thinking about creating an article about the morning show, but the thing is I don't believe it to be notable/factual/referenced enough to warrant inclusion. The sections I've removed were embarrassingly unencyclopedic and should have never been included in the first place. Please express your opinions on this matter before reverting. --Ouzo (talk) 17:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've readded the section about his controversial statements with citations from Star Tribune (since that's the only place they're documented). If you're going to edit or remove them, please have a valid reason. --Ouzo (talk) 19:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think an article about the show warrants inclusion. The Howard Stern show and Dan Patrick Show are two other examples where the show is the outward personality of the on-air talent. Group29 (talk) 22:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure we have articles on Howard Stern, Dan Patrick, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc, but those are household names and are syndicated nationwide. I doubt anyone outside of Minnesota and Wisconsin even know who he is, much less the show. The only sources we can really reference are Twin Cities newspapers and their official site which does not include a whole lot of information. Make the article if you want, but I doubt it would turn out much better than what was here before (most of this was written by avid fans no doubt). --Ouzo (talk) 04:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fully disagree with the previous post. I am a medical doctor from Russia. And I do know who is Tom Barnard, Terry Traen, Bob, Philip and other guys. Every day on my way to work I enjoy listening the KQ Morning Show podcast that I get on iTunes. I really love the way the guys make the show and I wish you the best of luck! You are the best! Thank you for doing the show. What is more, I often listen to the music on KQRS. Thnx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.222.225.133 (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tom Barnard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081109040243/http://www.nab.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Press_Releases1 to http://www.nab.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Press_Releases1&CONTENTID=5019&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:10, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tom Barnard. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090105170405/http://92kqrs.com/morningshow.asp to http://www.92kqrs.com/morningshow.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]