Talk:Bob Simon

message: Who took out the atheist link and Why? If you want to view it, look on the history page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.105.209.231 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 11 January 2007‎ (UTC)
: What atheist link? Can't find it in the history. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Atheism

message: I do not understand why this information keeps being removed. This story was widely covered in both the US and Israeli press. It is clearly a notable story that he produced just like his reporting on Sudan which is mentioned in the wiki article. There are no other articles of his that I can find that have more coverage than this one. We have the Washington Post, Hareetz, Jewish Daily Forward, The Atlantic, the Jerusalem Post, and the Weekly Standard all giving extensive coverage (I could find more) to the story. If that is not a notable story of his, then he has none?Patapsco913 (talk) 06:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless there is some clear reason why this show, of the hundreds he hosted, is relevant to his bio, it is irrelevant. The majority of 60 Minutes shows cover notable, controversial topics. If anywhere, it might be relevant to some article about the subject covered, not his bio. --Light show (talk) 06:21, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What other story that he has written has caused so much discussion and controversey?? The Jewish Daily Forward ("Breaking News Bob Simon, Stoked Israel Controversy on '60 Minutes,' Dies in Car Crash"] even has it as the lead in his obituary.Patapsco913 (talk) 06:29, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The four in the lead for starters. It's common for other news reports to write about topics brought up on 60 Minutes. And if you read the 60 Minutes article, you'll note that it's loaded with discussions about controversial shows, and whoever hosts a show is secondary. --Light show (talk) 06:51, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Which story of Bob Simon's created more controversy than "Christians in the Holy Land" - given its coverage in all the major papers, it clearly is something that is every bit as notable. It is even the lead heading on one of his obituaries?Patapsco913 (talk) 07:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Many, such as countless stories about his Iraq imprisonment, which he wrote a book about. --Light show (talk) 07:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: So you name one, what other stories have as much coverage in the papers I named above. As we do not seem to agree, WP:3O is an optionPatapsco913 (talk) 09:52, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

text: Agree. As most of the stories covered by 60 Minutes are notable, if not controversial, deciding which if any to include is an issue. For example, if the story in question is included, wouldn't a similar story by Simon about Christians in Egypt be equally important? --Light show (talk) 17:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

text: One problem is that all of the articles above are about Oren, and his well publicized dissatisfaction with a 60 Minutes story. If you can cite a RS which shows that this was one of the few times that a government or official has complained about one of Simon's 100s of stories, it would then have context. As to your question about why no one has complained about his story reporting attacks on Christians in Egypt, maybe that's because the subject was not in dispute. --Light show (talk) 23:11, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not why sure I have to prove a negative. There is sufficient coverage of this controversy which Simon initiated and even he states that it was unprecedented for someone to complain to his superiors (the Ambassador of Israel to the US nontheless) before a story was released. It was Simon's story and interview that set off the firestorm. Patapsco913 (talk) 03:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

text: Comment/format fix— I took those to be instructions of sorts. Not the proper way/format to list (or proper instructions), made them look like/constitute consensus "votes". People could take different reasonings not inclusive to those.Update: Title of the RFC is really enough "instruction" for people to know what the Survey is about. WP:RFC-"Statement[s] should be neutral and brief".  notification. —Lightgodsy(TALKCONT) 15:00, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Christians in the Holy Land

message: ====Survey====
*Support inclusion of the story, which helps the reader. Patapsco913 (talk) 03:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment/format fix— I took those to be instructions of sorts. Not the proper way/format to list (or proper instructions), made them look like/constitute consensus "votes". People could take different reasonings not inclusive to those.Update: Title of the RFC is really enough "instruction" for people to know what the Survey is about. WP:RFC-"Statement[s] should be neutral and brief".  notification. —Lightgodsy(TALKCONT) 15:00, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC: Should the controversey over the Christians in the Holy Land story be included in the article?

message: *Support inclusion of the story, which helps the reader. Patapsco913 (talk) 03:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment/format fix— I took those to be instructions of sorts. Not the proper way/format to list (or proper instructions), made them look like/constitute consensus "votes". People could take different reasonings not inclusive to those.Update: Title of the RFC is really enough "instruction" for people to know what the Survey is about. WP:RFC-"Statement[s] should be neutral and brief".  notification. —Lightgodsy(TALKCONT) 15:00, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Copying a photo from a website and using it for the lead would be OK as non-free. An example of the upload paramenters would be this one, which is also used for the lead image. The width should be no more than 400 px. --Light show (talk) 09:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead photo request 

message: This article is currently in :Category:American diplomats. What is the rationale for this? As far as I know, Simon, never worked as an actual diplomat, although he was of course a journalist who sometimes covered diplomats. If no rationale given, I am going to remove that category. Thanks KConWiki (talk) 13:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The article states that he was an American Foreign Service officer. The American Foreign Service is part of the Department of State. Employees perform consular and diplomatic services for the US government. That would make him a diplomat, although probably not a high-ranking one, considering his age at the time of his employment there. Siberian Husky (talk) 15:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out - KConWiki (talk) 16:12, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: American Diplomats category?

message: There may be more to Simon's death than a simple car accident.  Details are emerging about the driver, who may have suffered a heart attack just prior to the crash. The New York Police Department reports he had nine prior traffic incidents.  Since he had been driving livery less than a year, he held a probationary license, and his license was suspended immediately after the accident.  Now I'm also hearing in radio reports that he was a homeless person who lived at a shelter and drove limousines at night, which he rented from an agency, and that he had a lame arm as a result of an earlier suicide attempt.  Although Simon may not have been as big a celebrity as Princess Diana, the circumstances of his death have some similar weird elements.  Stay tuned. — QuicksilverT @ 17:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circumstances of death 

message: My feeling is that the reference to RT should be removed. It's highly speculative and not encyclopedic. Also, the citation contains no info. 69.157.69.125 (talk) 02:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree completely. — Neonorange (talk) 12:09, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Death Section