Talk:Chris Hayes

message: Perhaps this has been discussed but why isn't the details on the controversy in it's own heading, as is the case with most other biographies? It seems a little weird that it is sandwiched between two different gigs he had as a TV Journalist.   They seem like they should be adjacent, and the controversy should have it's own section.  Perhaps other gigs of his should be added to that section, but I don't think he has had any other controversy.  His media career is separate from the one time he put his foot in his mouth.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZeroXero (talk • contribs) 19:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why isn't the controversy in own section?  

message: how do you do it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.196.144.11 (talk) 14:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ridiclous 

message: An anonymous editor has repeatedly inserted a "controversy" section whose only citation is one of the subject's own Twitter posts. Twitter is obviously not a reliable source, and especially given that the subject is a living person, it's not appropriate to include in the article. Anyone disagree? Binarybits (talk) 20:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing wrong with a controversy section, but it must be decently cited. It doesn't have to be perfectly cited -- a work in progress is ok -- but Twitter posts are not sufficient. ask123 (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy based on twitter post 

message: Chris marries Kate A. Shaw, here referred to as "long-time Kate A. Shaw", what is a "long-time Kate A. Shaw"? V85 (talk) 08:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kate A. Shaw 

message: Rationale is described in WP:COMMONNAME: Wikipedia's editorial standard for naming of persons is that the common name be used rather than the individual's formal name.  EG WP article is "Bill Clinton" not "William Jefferson Clinton".  I will move this in a few days unless someone thinks this might be controversial.  J JMesserly (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed rename to Chris Hayes (journalist) 

message: Lots of people have commented about the "controversy".  Why give sace to more of Coulters inane misogynist rants?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.68.156 (talk) 06:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Stupid comment by Coulter

message: The current photo (christopher hayes headshot) is of higher quality than the former switzerland photo, but is not representative because he never appears on camera without his glasses.  It would be really nice if someone took a decent photo of him and released it with an appropriate free license.
Secondly, there was a vandalization or possibly some confusion by contributor 99.68.185.148  Hayes' father is  not Richard Wilbur, but is Roger Hayes.  I did not insert the correct father name because he is a private citizen.  He was formerly an activist knowledgeable of Saul Alinsky methods as documented in this source.  Possibly some might think it is noteworthy enough, but the marginal value in my view does not outweigh discretion about info on a private individuals.  J JMesserly (talk) 18:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried replacing the photo with a more recent one, but I was reverted.  If anyone would like to upload a better photo, there are plenty of creative commons photos here . MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 17:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: These are all uploadable to commons. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:29, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

text: I'm working on uploading a new headshot now. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

text: Very nice, I like this shot.  MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 19:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good shot, but blurry. What would be really nice is an in-focus picture of him (with glasses I suppose ;)). ask123 (talk) 13:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo not representative/ Hayes' father 

message: Per WP:ELNO, the external links section of an article is not for compiling a comprehensive directory of every page you can find on the internet that pertains to the article topic at all; it is only for the one or two most immediate primary websites of the topic themselves. Articles about or featuring Chris Hayes in other media, such as the following, might be useful as references for article content, but should not be simply added directly to external links:
* Video debates featuring Hayes on Bloggingheads.tv
* Five Minutes With Christopher Hayes by Jake Blumgart, Campus Progress, June 17, 2009
- Bearcat (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Surprised that neither in this article nor in those on Up with Chris Hayes and All In with Chris Hayes is there any comparison of how his 21st century persona, format and vibe have changed. He didn't just don a tie when he abruptly quit Up on weekends to go daily with All In: He's also drastically changed his show line-up, thus diluting his focus and all but relinquishing his brand. Up was refreshing because Chris almost never had the traditional "old white straight men" constitute a majority of guests, instead usually showcasing fresh faces; largely women, non-Americans, people of color and/or LGBTs as panel experts -- letting them loose to dig deep or challenge each other's premises, without competing with them. He reserved for himself the role at which he was best; succinctly providing context and connecting dots when new factoids or issues were introduced by guests. That's all just gone. Chris himself remains articulate, thorough, upbeat and (relatively) balanced -- but his show is now just like most of the other MSNBC talk show line-up and, finding no value-added, I've drifted back to Maddow for wry but heart-felt truth and to O'Donnell for jugular-slashing analytics. Realizing that Chris switched cities to do the new gig, isn't there yet a body of commentary on the profound retro-shift in his targeted audience? PlayCuz (talk) 01:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Where did his mojo go?

message: I would to see his occupation reverted to "News Anchor" exclusively. I haven't found any evidence of him being employed as a philospher.  I propose, if there are no dissenting opinions to this point in the next 30 days, (11/4/2013) the tag be reverted. WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 21:33, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Unless there is something missing, all I see related to that is his prior philosophy degree.  One's degree doesn't define their profession though. Caidh (talk) 22:31, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Pursuant to my previous proposal of revision, I will be reverting his occupancy to "News Anchor" exclusively.WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 00:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Occupation: Philospher

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Chris Hayes (journalist). 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6Fc1aAQ8s?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcuni.com%2Fcorporate%2Fnewsroom%2Fall-in-with-chris-hayes-premieres-on-april-1-at-8pm-et%2F to http://www.nbcuni.com/corporate/newsroom/all-in-with-chris-hayes-premieres-on-april-1-at-8pm-et/
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) 07:49, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Look, I happen to agree with a lot of what Chris Hayes says but that doesn't change the fact that what he does is not journalism. If it were in a newspaper it would be called op/ed. There's nothing wrong with opinion or commentary, but journalism is something different. 
For reference here is the American Press Institute's (a nonprofit journalism training org founded in 1946 as an extension of Columbia Journalism School) take on the elements that constitute journalism (this is the definition agreed upon by most US journalism associations): https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/ Amywestervelt (talk) 04:48, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you're saying, but I don't think sources agree. Regardless, he definitely was a journalist of prominence at one point, even if you disagree with that label now. He has been nominated for a Peabody and similar specifically for news, and his Emmy as arguably for journalism, as well. The current title of the article is based on him being a journalist, so any removal of that point should come after starting and resolving a discussion about renaming the article, not before. Grayfell (talk) 05:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hayes does commentary, not journalism  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Chris Hayes (journalist). 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://archive.is/20130205181728/http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/war-dead-conservative-political-correctness/567351 to http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/war-dead-conservative-political-correctness/567351
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130104042419/http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/02/12025345-bridging-the-civilian-military-divide to http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/02/12025345-bridging-the-civilian-military-divide
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbcuni.com/corporate/newsroom/all-in-with-chris-hayes-premieres-on-april-1-at-8pm-et/
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) 22:25, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Who cares, at this point, what Trump did with his Covid shots. I did not believe much of what Trump said. What are you trying to do with this story? I do not think it is news nor does anything that Trump does real news now. Please , Trump did far worse things than lie about his vaccinations. Let him fade unless there is a real story. 2601:646:4100:A9A0:D0C5:AB5E:C3F8:2F4C (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trump and vaccinations