Talk:Lucianne Goldberg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Removal of unsubstantiated attacks[edit]

I have removed several unsubstantiated and defamatory allegations from this article. Please do not replace them unless we have reliable sources.

Capitalistroadster 17:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Goldberg's comments about Chelsea Clinton appear in David Brock's book Blinded By the Right, but they shouldn't be readded until they are checked. Gamaliel 00:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Even if it is in Brock's book, we should be very careful in placing them back because they are hearsay. I would be reluctant to include Brock as a reliable source. Capitalistroadster 00:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • In my view, we need to be very careful about what we put in to make sure it is relevant to portraying a subjects life. Capitalistroadster 00:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. However, I'd like to see the original source before we decide whether or not to include it. Gamaliel 01:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The allegations regarding Goldberg and LBJ apparently appear in Jeffrey Toobin's book A Vast Conspiracy. Goldberg threatened a libel suit, but I do not know if anything came of that threat. Gamaliel 01:06, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns are that both allegations are weak. The Clinton allegations are potentially defamatory and we would need much stronger sources than Brock to warrant publishing them. The matters about LBJ aren't mentioned in any of the standard biographies about him so the ultimate source is Kitty Kelley. Capitalistroadster 02:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, since we (or at least I haven't) seen the original sources, I think it is premature to decide how substantial a particular account is or whether or not to include it. Without referring to anything in particular, I don't see any problem with recounting things that have been published in prominent books or major newspapers as long as they are properly sourced and as long as we do not present allegations as facts. Gamaliel 02:53, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
My concerns are in line with Wikipedia:Biographies on living persons deserve a special sensitivity. Capitalistroadster 03:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Starr report[edit]

This section should contain facts from verifiable sources. Capitalistroadster 01:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Lucianne.com a blog?[edit]

We've had three recent versions of the start of the "Commentator" section:

  1. Following the impeachment scandal, Goldberg has launched a conservative discussion website called lucianne.com. Lucianne.com is a news site. Users post news articles, columns and comment from on-line newspapers, magazines or news sites. Though the website does not allow ...
  2. Following the impeachment scandal, Goldberg has launched a conservative blog called lucianne.com. Though the blog does not allow
  3. During the impeachment scandal, Goldberg launched a conservative political website called lucianne.com, which is now a popular internet forum. As at Free Republic, users start comment threads with links to items at on-line newspapers, magazines or news sites, followed by discussion by users. Though the website does not allow ...

(We're currently back to #2.)

As User:Asbl pointed out (in an edit summary), Lucianne.com is similar to Daily Kos in some ways. From Daily_Kos#Features (emphasis added):

Daily Kos is not a standard blog, but an interactive site powered by the collaborative media application Scoop, which allows all registered members to maintain blogs within the site. Moulitsas and a small group of selected users post entries directly to the front page; other users can post "diaries," whose titles appear on the front page in reverse chronological order. These are identical in format to the main posts, and can advance to "recommended diary" status by user vote, or can be promoted to the front page by the primary contributors. The recommended diaries appear above the main diary listing.

The main difference between the sites is that Kos and the other diarists write a post, then other people comment on it. At Lucianne.com and Free Republic, threads begin with a link to another website, not a piece of original writing. So, as someone who is picky about terminology, I would say thay (1) Kos is a blogger, but (2) Daily Kos is not a blog but rather a "single-website community" of blogs. Another way to look at it is that there is (AFAIK) no place on Lucianne.com where you read Lucianne's comments on events, issues, etc. That seems to me to be one of the defining characteristics of a blog.

We probably should mention Free Republic in this section, because Lucianne used to be active there (in fact, I'd guess that Lucianne.com was closely modelled on www.freerepublic.com) and the sites operate in similar ways (and have not-widly-dissimilar politics). See this 1999 Salon article for details.

By the way, Lucianne.com started in late 1998 or early 1999, which was "following", not "during", the impeachment scandal, so I was wrong about that. However the proximate cause was a ruction at freerepublic, not the scandal itself, so "following" is somewhat misleading.

Cheers, CWC(talk) 16:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On this page, wikipedia says Lucianne was born in Boston. On Jonah Goldbergs page, wikipedia says she was born in Virginia. Both can't be true.

Comment about the above statement: Mrs. Goldberg may have been born in Boston, but she lived as a child from a very young age in the Northern Virginia suburbs of DC, as I have read, writing in later years for various small grass roots publications in Virgina, prior to being hired at the Washington Post, where she held minor jobs, but was, in fact, noticed by many notable writers. Again, she did live a great part of her childhood life Virginia.

Biography assessment rating comment[edit]

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee 20:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lucianne Goldberg. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 09:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lucianne Goldberg. 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.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 06:19, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article is full of not NPOV and peacock language[edit]

Compare the current version to this one. Lucianne's parents have now been elevated to royalty ("von"), her work history has been completely recast as that of a prodigy, etc. It is ridiculous. I usually complain about conservative political BLPs being slanderous or hatchet jobs. This BLP is the very opposite. It is shameless promotional content. I will try to clear out the worst of it.--FeralOink (talk) 08:22, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lucianne_Goldberg&oldid=1207290767"