Talk:Joy Behar

message: yes/no
Am I the only one who notices that "Moron" is listed as one of her occupations?  I completely agree, but It doesn't seem fair...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.189.137.240 (talk) 15:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Atheist

message: I'm concerned that two individuals are continually deleting text and links to current and past Behar controversies. These items are factual and duly sourced to reliable sources. Some include video of Behar herself.
74.60.63.155 11:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Continual deletions of factual statements, quotes, and sources

message: IMDB and NNDB list Ms. Behar's birth year as 1943. Someone from an anonymous IP keeps changing the year to 1942 (usually leaving a half deleted reference tag), saying that NNDB is not accurate and saying they got the date from Public Service records. We need a specific reference, not just a vague reference to Public Service records, ie what specific records show this date, and where can we find them. If it's something only the poster has access to it can't be used as a source. I'm not going to change it back for now to give the anonymous poster time to come up with a real reference, but if they don't in a few days I will change it back to the IMDB date, which is currently the only source we have access to.--HarryHenryGebel 15:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthday

message: Several months ago Rosie and Joy alluded to Bill O'Reilly's sexual harassment lawsuit.  This is what happened next according to Rosie at rosie.com:
Legal filing about Bill O'Reilly's sexual harassment lawsuit are here.
:Paranoia is not a laughing matter. 208.111.241.155 (talk) 17:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intimidation from Bill O'Reilly and Fox News

message: IMDB is claimed as a source for three statements in this article.  IMDB does not meet the Wikipedia:Reliable Sources guidelines, since it is a site made of user contributions, much like Wikipedia -- so claiming IMDB as a source for a Wikipedia article is about as legitimate as claiming Wikipedia itself as a source.
Of course, it is just a guideline, so I won't edit out the reference in this case.  But I think WP editors would be well-advised to look elsewhere for sources in future.  ♥♥♥ 18.252.5.63 13:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliable Source Reminder

message: An editor keeps inserting unsupported OR about Behar's fidgeting with her pen and the like. This is not notable, nor is it something that any citations have been provided for - I'm not talking about whether or not it is true, the issue is whether independent sources have cited it as having some kind of significance.  I also think we need to keep WP:BLP in mind.  I've removed this material twice and I don't think it should be allowed to stand in the article. The editor who has inserted it also has not given any reason in edit summary for its inclusion. Tvoz |talk 21:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, sorry, but that's not the way it works.  You need to read WP:BLP,  and also WP:NOTE and WP:OR. Please stop adding this material. Tvoz |talk 23:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

text: And while you're reading, try WP:CIVIL for your edit summary. Tvoz |talk 16:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not a fan of Joy Behar at all but I don't understand why her fidgeting is important at all?  Frankly I don't care.  And if she has some sort of nervous problem that's her business and it's disrespectful for us to point out an issue she can't help.  I'd much rather point out all the dumb things she says if we want to criticize her.Kgj08 (talk) 14:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right - it is not important. That's why it's not in the article any more. Tvoz |talk 20:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: fidgeting

message: I added the section about her calling Michelle Malkin a "selfish bitch" and then later criticizing John McCain for not correcting one of his supporters when they called Hillary Clinton a "selfish bitch".  This has been a pretty big story right now and should be mentioned.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kgj08 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Somebody took out my source for the Real Time section.  Why?  I documented the video on Youtube.  I would think that the actual video of what happened would be the best source possible since it can't take her statements out of context as an article would.  Leave that source please.Kgj08 (talk) 14:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Real Time with Bill Maher

message: I question the accuracy and lack of bias in the easy characterization of "...Behar stands on the far-Left side of the political aisle."  Whatever the intent, it reads like the way conservative commentators characterize anyone to their left in an effort to make their views appear non-mainstream. As far as the article goes, Ms. Behar's are not.
Pm birch (talk) 20:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't see any source for the POV assertion, so I've deleted it while leaving the list of positions (which should also have sources).  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 21:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Far-Left side? 

message: Is her father, Gino Occhiuto, the one who shows up in the Ellis Island record as having emigrated in 1924 from Fagnano Castello, Calabria? Badagnani (talk) 05:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Father 

message: The controversy section, while factual, seems a little petty at times.  The incident with Sharon Angle looks to be well over 500 words and reads like an episode of The Real Housewives.  "She's a bitch, she's a moron, she's evil, she's hitler."  I don't think we need the play by play.  No one will remember Sharon Angle next year, much less this incident.  I'd recommend removing it.
As a comparison, Elizabeth Hasselbeck's page doesn't contain a controversy section and seems much more neutral.  I'd recommend going for the tone of that page vs this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonnewyork (talk • contribs) 20 June 2011
Any thoughts on these comments?Jasonnewyork (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You can be bold and remove it yourself; you don't need anyone's permission. ;-) I agree that the section is too long and too detailed in relation to the article as a whole. And even though I spend a ridiculous amount of time on Wikipedia every day, I didn't have a chance to respond to your message until now. Doesn't mean you're the only one who feels that way; it just means that people have lives and can't always respond instantaneously. Be patient and don't get discouraged. :-)  –BMRR (talk) 02:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The page is locked for me or else I would have changed it.  Is it locked for everyone or am I on some special list?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonnewyork (talk • contribs) 04:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, didn't realize you weren't able to edit it.  I don't think you're on any special list, but I see that you joined Wikipedia just recently, and currently the page is "semi-protected" (due to ongoing vandalism), which if I'm not mistaken means that only established Wikipedia members can edit it.  Once your account reaches "autoconfirmed" status, you'll be able to edit semi-protected articles. –BMRR (talk) 04:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section 

message: Change She also was a hosted the show Live from Queens; TO She also hosted the show Live from Queens; MiaXAH (talk) 06:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: --Zander251 (talk) 06:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 December 2021 

message: Joy's ex husband Joseph Behar wasn't a college professor but a television show director. See link from wiki: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Behar
Her current spouse is a retired school teacher. 184.81.118.210 (talk) 05:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done:.  It looks like that is a different Joe Behar.  The New York Times article  also refers to him as a professor.  RudolfRed (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2022 

message: Joy is also a political activist, please add that to her profile.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.1.179.7 (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joy is also a political activist 

message: Her birthdate is October 7, 1942, so she is 79 47.188.132.107 (talk) 23:16, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:24, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2022 

message: Yes her birthday is October 7, 1942 so she is 79. Source: https://www.etonline.com/joy-behar-on-developing-a-tough-skin-for-the-view-season-26-and-turning-80-exclusive-190337  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C46:6800:21F8:25C2:918:47A0:110C (talk) 23:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthday

message: The first sentence in the bio claims Joy Behar is a comedian. She is not a comedian. She is a propagandist. 2601:190:780:3570:CC25:BB06:8268:DE83 (talk) 18:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 18:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2023 

message: 174.94.66.208 (talk) 03:23, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 15:23, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2024