Talk:Tom Brokaw/Archive 1

message: I have to put my two cents in as I agree that deletion without a rewrite is bad form.  I really
don't see why there is a problem with the format.  It does impart information that I previously
did not know, thus I like to have this available.  Dmsar 21:38, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved to talk for easier access - Hephaestos 03:56, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: This article does need a bit of clean-up, mostly putting the facts into a proper sentence structure. Still, it's very informative Gulfstorm75 03:20, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up 

message: This sentence was in paragraph 2 of Biography and was way out of chronological order so I cut it.  I paste it here for anyone who might like to figure out where to put it.  I'm too tired to figure that part out. Onyourside 01:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of order 

message: Just letting everyone know that I'm planning on completely overhauling this article in the coming weeks. Mr. Brokaw deserves a better article. :) Gzkn 07:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: What is with the image?? And, what is with all these unflattering images of TV anchors... Tom, Dan, Katie, etc..
LOL -- I gotta agree.  The first thing I thought of when I saw that was Clint Eastwood saying, "do you feel lucky, punk?"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.147.4.69 (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: He also asked "Are we at war?" and exclaimed "War! War!" in the style of a sports chant.
This shouldn't have been removed, it's far more notable than the remaining war quote. MartinSFSA (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right about me adding and maintaining it, but wrong on every other point. First of all the source of the quote is already in the text. Secondly you could have added it, and finally I'm not concerned about being "branded" anything by anonymous. MartinSFSA (talk) 18:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks, but it's neither surprising nor relevant NBC hasn't archived this little gem. And it's not just my memory; we received it in Australia, making this the best known source. MartinSFSA (talk) 05:17, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please show why this is notable by providing other sources which discuss the incident. --NeilN talk to me 18:17, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a request for a higher level of demonstrative notability than in the guidelines. As far as I know this was the first public demand for retribution. Or possibly, as events have unfolded, it demonstrates a certain prescience on Brokaw's behalf. Why am I expected to contribute both primary notability and secondary source confirmation in this instance? MartinSFSA (talk) 18:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are describing the quote as "in the style of a sports chant" (your opinion) and have not shown why it's worth mentioning beyond your speculations. --NeilN talk to me 18:39, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  War chant 

message: The article says:
Brokaw suffers from a speech impediment as the result of a birth defect (cleft lip). 
The citation is not sufficient, as it's just one anonymous person's post on a message board.  I also suspect a cleft palette would be obvious; it seems untrue to me.  We should probably revert this addition.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjbprime (talk • contribs) 02:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speech impediment 

message: The article says:
Rumored candidates for the job include Chuck Todd, David Gregory, Andrea Mitchell, Chris Matthews, and Gwen Ifill.
It's not impossible for rumors to be verifiable. You are, after all, verifying that the rumor exists, rather than that the rumor is true. And this needs to be verified by a reputable source, or else Wikipedia starts looking like a poor cousin to the National Enquirer, People Magazine, and the cable "news" channels. 
72.72.129.86 (talk) 01:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rumors 

message: I'm sorry but the last few lines of his career 2008 after mentioning he'll be monitoring the 2nd Prez debate, this comes up:
"What is a debate without the discussion of civilocity; the benefits and disadvantages of watching the person whom you voted to power in a democracy the entire time that person is in service to you? Is a better educated society a better society? A candidate not running on civilocity surely doesn't have the peoples best interest at heart. Any senator, representative, or person opposed of civilocity is asking not to know the full story."
This seems to be either misplaced or something, but surely does not belong in Brokaw's wiki.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.25.187 (talk) 08:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't believe that "civilocity" is a word. David spector (talk) 18:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  editsemiprotected 

message: Some description of his personality traits may be helpful to gain a better understanding of who Mr. Brokaw is. Various colleagues, and publications have written brief opinions on him. He has been described as very socially conscious (social climber) in New York, with a high degree of self-importance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Factcorrect12 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personality 

message: At around 5:45 on Friday, December 4, 2009, Tom Brokaw was involved in a car accident in New York. He and his wife had no serious injuries but the woman in the other car was killed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dillboat96 (talk • contribs) 23:28, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Give it some time, there will be plenty of detailed articles from reliable sources to use. This definitely will meet the threshold of notability. You should have no problems with this addition, enjoy. ThinkEnemies (talk) 00:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Really?  This is worthy to enter as an encyclopedic entry for Tom Brokaw?  Seriously?  Leave it to the dramatic Wiki geeks who feel the need to detail EVERYTHING about someone.  This site is turning more into People magazine-like versus an actual place for reference, which is exactly why my donations have STOPPED.  If you want to read about that go to any news site, not WIkipedia.  207.38.156.111 (talk) 02:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Sorry, forgot to 'sign' with login name.Tatumstevens2 (talk) 03:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Car Accident