Talk:Armstrong Williams

message: There is merged Disinfopedia information here; some note of the cross-history information should perhaps be made, as with any transwiki move.  +sj + 18:44, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Image:Armstrong Williams.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:16, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Armstrong Williams.jpg

message: From what I've seen, he seems to be talked about relatively more by the African American community.  But the article does not state that he is black.  Any explanation?  Is he one of those very rare and almost always controversial persons, a black Republican?Bdell555 (talk) 03:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  why is this man controversial amongst black community? 

message: This article seems to have NPOV  issues.  This article is a BLP however it mainly focuses on no child left behind, not on the person.
Cloak&Dagger (talk) 06:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had asked the question about whether it was OK to include the NCLB incident (see section above). It seemed a notable enough controversy to include, but I wasn't sure on the intricacies of biographic info. --Sstrader (talk) 19:52, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  The section on NCLB seemed to me to be overly detailed and to take up too much space in relation to the rest of the article. I condensed it. I also thought it was weird that the section on his media career led off with the NCLB controversy, so I moved it down further in the article. SunCrow (talk) 04:32, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I think Howard Stirk Holdings LLC should have it's own article and not redirect.--Wikipietime (talk) 01:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howard Stirk Holdings LLC 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Armstrong Williams. 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/20130503102600/http://rightsidewire.com/2011/03/the-graham-williams-group/ to http://rightsidewire.com/2011/03/the-graham-williams-group/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article needs more sources, and I have added inline tags. SunCrow (talk) 04:30, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs more sources