Talk:Michael Moore/Archive 4

message: Shouldn't his appearance at the Oscars in 2003 be included in the main article. It could now be seen as a heroic action for degrading the bush administration and its decision to invade Iraq. Even though he was booed and music droned him off the stage, his position then reflects the majority of the american population as opposed to what it did in 2003.
:yes. Ill try and put that in later. Or go ahead if you feel like it. Turtlescrubber 09:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2003 Oscar Appearance

message: Is Michael really a life member of the NRA.  Can someone put a citation to this?
He says it himself in Bowling for Columbine 80.229.222.48 21:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NRA

message: Michael has struggled with weight issues througout his life.  This has impacted how he is perceived, and, unfortunately, he receives a lot of negative criticism from people for his weight (including from Ralph Nader).  Recently, I believe he lost a significant amount of weight..... yeah right. Lets just he's the big the one and is a sicko in how much he eats. maybe he should stop ruining America and his body and work out and eat healthy once. Would it be appropriate to include a section about his weight? 64.109.56.48 07:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I met Michael a few weeks ago, and he has not lost weight.  Brianga 10:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I understand Michael's latest film praises the NHS in England, which restricts treatment to very obese people . Does this make Michael's weight relevant, given that he would probably be unable to receive treatment in many NHS hospitals? --Dilaudid 17:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Somewhat of an exxaguration. He would recieve treatment however if he had an obesity related condition requiring ongoing treatment he might be told he had to try and loose weight first.80.229.222.48 10:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weight

message: Can we get a better picture of him?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bear199 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: I added that Moore appeared in "Blood In The Face" to the "Appearances in other documentaries" list. What's the reason for it being removed? Thanks. --Weakmassive 17:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Blood In The Face

message: While CANADIAN BACON was finished before Wagon's East, The Release Date for Canadian Bacon was Sept 22. 2005, while Wagon's East was released almost a year earlier on August 29, 1994.  This is according to imdb.com.63.147.237.66 17:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not An Error

message: Hi
Why have somebody deleted my external link to this article on Michael Moore ?
To this article on Moore I have added an external link, that later was deleted by someone, and I find no diskussion or argument here on teh matter.
It is a webliography, named
Michael Moore & Fahrenheit 9/11
The site is the Copenhagen-based Tidsskriftcentret.dk - progressive online library
It contains
# Websites
# Articles and reviews
# Funny stuff
and I have added it on the defence part of external lins, since it is clearly pro-Moores political goals (though some critical of the film itself).
BUT contrary to the present external links, this is a collection of links to reviews etc.
which means - contrary to the present external links - that they have beem compiled and evalueted and most of the stuff commented or summed up.
Now I am just waiting for an answer 
Hi
Jørgen Lund
Librarian, CHP
: Firstly because this is the english part of wikipedia.  English links normally go on the english part of wikipedia, french links on the french part of wikipedia, etc.
: Secondly because you added the link to a number of articles.  And we generally consider that spamming.  Please read our rules on Wikipedia:External links. AlistairMcMillan 21:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tidsskrift...

message: I've seen some rumor somewhere that he isnt allowed into one of the American states...I'm not sure if that's true or not. Little help?
::Definately not true... it would be completely unconstitutional. VxP 18:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The closest thing I can think of that could be at all legal would be for some resident of a state to have said publicly that Moore was not welcome in that state. Even a public figure or politician could legally say he was not welcome in a given state, as opposed to being denied entry.Lawikitejana 23:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless he was found guilty under some law, and charges were brought against him in that state, I don't believe they can just refuse to let someone in. Posie 17:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  States of America 

message: Request semiprotection for this article due to anon vandalism over several days ST47 22:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection?

message: Why does the article come to such an abrupt end? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.137.148.27 (talk • contribs) 
:I restored it.  Most probably, an editor accidentally deleted it the last portion of the article (certain technical problems can do this).  Keep up the good work. --TeaDrinker 01:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: End of Article

message: If its okay with everyone I would like to move the quote section to wikiquote. I dont know wikipedia's exact policy on quotations (does anyone?) but I think that this would be a good way to start cleaning up the page. Disagreement? Jasper23 08:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation section move? 

message: While reading this article I noticed that the Criticism section is marked with the "weasel words" flag.  However, the references in that section seem to all be correctly cited now.  Given the amount of editorial focus and scrutiny this section has undergone, :) I propose that the label be removed.  Thoughts? Randy549 04:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to concur.  The tag was added  on June 10, the difference with the current version is here.  I see a pretty good change, especially toward the beginning.  The (now archived) discussion of the tag was here.  The only place I see immediately where the criticism may still apply is the section on his bithplace.  Most of those critics, while unnamed in the article, are cited.  I think it is time to removed the tag, and I have done so boldy.  --TeaDrinker 09:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "May Contain Weasel Words" flag still necessary? 

message: and turn the depiction section into a smaller and more compact trivia section. What do people think?
Yeah, I did. Moved some stuff around too. Just trying to be bold. Jasper23 19:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think we should create a criticisms page 

message: In the Writings and political views section there is a line that says "Moore became a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association upon winning an NRA tournament as a youth.".  Please tell me this is just simple vandalism.
BigSciZot 23:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's actually true. Moore's NRA membership was mentioned in Bowling for Columbine. Eron 00:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I know it's true that he's a lifetime member, but I don't recall hearing about the NRA tourney. --badlydrawnjeff talk 00:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Likewise. I heard he joined the NRA to take them down from the inside (no idea how he was going to due that). In any case, we should be able to find some sourced material so we don't have to go by what we heard. VxP 17:14, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes he is a member of the NRA.  You can use his movie 'Bowling for Columbine' if you can't find another citation.  --CrohnieGalTalk 23:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This cannot be true. 

message: The article needs major clean up. I removed some of these things that mark the entire page \'\'. Someone has to remove the rest.
--66.218.12.52 23:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted to an earlier version so that should eliminate this problem. Gamaliel 00:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean Up 

message: Ha ha ha... Now can someone fix this?
:Are you suggesting that Michael Moore is a big "boob"? If so, that's a reasonable argument. Jtpaladin 22:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirected from Breast implants 

message: Isn't a link to Michael More's homepage a violation of WP:BLP because it slanders George W. Bush? Andries 23:44, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. George W. Bush is a public person (as defined by Times v. Sullivan) and there's a high bar for defemation against a public person. VxP 21:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Violation of [[WP:BLP]]

message: I removed this page from the :Category:American progressives because the category itself says that it is a collection of "[Progressive] American political figure[s]...in the Progressive Era (the 1890s to the 1910s)." Michael Moore does not fit that category (having been born after 1920). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaac Crumm (talk • contribs) 05:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you for real? Do you have any idea what a "Progressive" is? Most liberals and left-wingers use that term to indentify themselves as "Progressives" right now. Jtpaladin 22:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: American Progressives Category