Talk:CNN/YouTube presidential debates

message: I realize that this is essentially original research, but how can we say that "The Democratic Party installment was the first presidential debate to have a question that did not come from a moderator"? Anyone familiar with the 2004 presidential elections knows that the second debate had questions written and asked by members of the audience, albeit questions that were preselected by a moderator. If you are not familiar with this debate, please see United States presidential election debates, 2004#Second presidential debate — 8 October and write back with your opinion. BassoProfundo 18:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After looking at the statement and your comment, I reworded it so it would clearer. Here is the new version of it: The Democratic Party installment was the first presidential debate to have a question asked by someone other than a moderator. Pants(T) 19:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's still not true; the questions in the 2004 "town hall" debate were asked by the audience members themselves. BassoProfundo 20:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed it, even though it had a source. The article (Reuters) must have had a mistake. Pants(T) 23:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not from a moderator?

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Consider adding more links to the article; per WP:MOS-L and WP:BTW, create links to relevant articles.
*Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.
*This article does not have any categories. Please categorize it with relevant Category:Categories.
*Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Pants(T) 20:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer review

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on CNN/YouTube presidential debates. 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/20081118114101/http://usliberals.about.com/b/a/257922.htm to http://usliberals.about.com/b/a/257922.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19930669/site/newsweek/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071201152222/http://www.commentarymagazine.com:80/blogs/index.php/jpodhoretz/1441 to http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/jpodhoretz/1441
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:57, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified