Talk:Ramesh Ponnuru

message: I feel that this article goes out of it's way to defend his book when the book isn't even that well explained. There certainly isn't enough supporting information or references. And the references that are used come exclusively from self described conservative publications. --waffle iron talk 03:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Attention to illogical quirks of English orthography and grammar during a causual discussion is usually a sign of either a small mind or a desire to distract attention from matters of substance. The IP 151... needs to spend less time in anonymous personal attacks, and more paying attention to how to be a colleague here (and perhaps elsewhere). --Jerzy•t 04:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The statement purports to be statement of fact (perhaps with the mild exception of "memorable", which is neither as verifiable nor as to the point as would have been "widely remarked upon".) Is Toddster's possbily rhetorical question asserting that it fails to satisfy NPoV? Or that someone was mistaken in asserting that it was an NPoV-rule violation?--Jerzy•t 04:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV tag

message: Why is there a link to the website for the Log Cabin Republicans at the end of this article? As far as I know, Ponnuru isn't gay.
Pjones 16:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Log Cabin Republicans?

message: I did some cleanup and copyediting.  I didn't see much POV in the version I edited, so I didn't change most of the established facts or links.  I filled in some information about his book and added a link to it.  I also fleshed out a description of his interview with John Stewart and the public backlash from it.  Consolidated some information (we had publication year, publisher, editor, and title in 3 different places), merged some sentences.  It's still a pretty lightweight article.  I removed the NPOV tag, I think it's pretty objective now.  As ever, please discuss if you have any objections.  Or just change what you don't like and I'll come discuss it if I disagree. Bjsiders 17:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: I wouldn't add anything about this without discussion, and preferably verification that it has been discussed off WP:
: _ _ In listening to NPR, i noted he was going to be on the show at some point, and kept waiting to hear who the female native-speaker of English, and convert to Catholicism, was, who seemed to be there as an enthusiastic sympathizer with this ideas.  The mid-program break came, and i said "OK, they'll be done with her, and introduce him, but she came back. Finally i realized that he (i was pretty sure the given name Ramesh is as masculine as is Robert) was the possessor of the "accentless" and feminine-sounding voice, and of the history of relgious affiliation that is atypical for people whose names the cultural tradition that his does.
: _ _ While none of this is discreditable in an American, and some of it is admirable, it wouldn't take much editing to make it into a personal attack, so i feel it's important to be sure it's notable before anyone tries out inserting it.
: _ _ If this isn't just a quirk of my casual listening while editing, speeding the dispelling of confusion like mine may well be an encyclopedic task.--Jerzy•t 04:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that's especially pertinent, considering most of his public facing stuff is written works. Could come off as an ad hominem attack. --waffle iron talk 20:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He is a writer. He has appeared on television, though.  His voice is one of the most memorable things about his image, especially because he's conservative.  This is probably what prompted the Log Cabin Republicans discussion above.  I don't think it's fair that the tone of his voice matters, but it still matters. - ShadowyCabal 21:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd have to agree with ShadowyCabal, Ponnuru's voice is one of the most memorable things about him however unfortunate that may be. Discussing his public image hardly constitutes an attack, but merely showcases an attempt at creating a complete and objective article. Information should not be disregarded simply because there is the chance that it might be taken wrongly, that is the first step towards censorship. It should definitely be included in the article.  Deyyaz [ Talk | Contribs ] 01:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be POV, though.  I don't know how much it matters in a real sense how he talks, than where he stands on the issues.  Is this a real issue that people actually think about other than you guys?  I mean, he talks like a little girl, but it doesn't seem to matter to me. --66.106.60.11 07:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well he was on The Colbert Report a few nights ago, and I had my back to the TV when he came on.  I heard the voice and thought it was either a woman or an effeminate man (gay != effeminate)... but then I saw it was him, and recognized him from other things.  It's definitely even more noticeable if you have your eyes closed.  I imagine it's most noticed on any radio appearances he might do. (Corby 10:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: His voice matters? I didn't find it that distinctive at all and even if it was, it certainly is not relevant or notable. Would it be reasonable to describe everyone's accent as well? There are better ways to invest our effort that writing about the tone of people's voices. -PullUpYourSocks 14:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: His voice is irrelevant if you are discussing the morality of abortion or The Party of Death.  His voice IS relevant if you are discussing TV personality, Ramesh Ponnuru.  He chose to appear publicly, and the public noticed the tone of his voice, that is factual.  Yes, it would be reasonable to describe everyone's accent if it's unique, and Ponnuru's is unique.  After all, there's plenty of talk about Truman Capote's voice. - ShadowyCabal 17:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inherant Confusion Hazard?

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject class rating

message: The stray reference to Ponnuru's opinion about the 2006 elections seems random and unprofessional -- Ponnuru has all sorts of ideas about a lot of things, and there's no reason why this one opinion should receive this kind of emphasis.  Priceyeah (talk) 22:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 2006 elections?

message: "Ramesh Ponnuru (/rəˈmɛʃ pəˈnʊəruː/; born August 16, 1974) is a Washington, D.C.-based Indian American columnist ..."
"Born	 August 16, 1974 (age 39)
Prairie Village, Kansas"
If the second part is true, then he is American, not "Indian American". I'm changing the language to reflect that.
Later in the article, it says "He is of Asian Indian descent ... "
That takes care of the information on his ethnicity. ---Dagme (talk) 22:57, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Indian American" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ramesh Ponnuru. 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://web.archive.org/web/20070416055656/http://www.onpointradio.org:80/shows/2006/06/20060615_b_main.asp to http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2006/06/20060615_b_main.asp
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090130014128/http://nrinstitute.org:80/staff.php to http://nrinstitute.org/staff.php
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070927011444/http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/05/christianism_de_5.html to http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/05/christianism_de_5.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060719114137/http://time.blogs.com:80/daily_dish/2006/07/email_of_the_da_2.html to http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/07/email_of_the_da_2.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080102141108/http://corner.nationalreview.com:80/post/?q=ZjdiYTNjZTdmOThlM2FkMzNmNjA0YWRlODA4NmU2ZTE= to http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjdiYTNjZTdmOThlM2FkMzNmNjA0YWRlODA4NmU2ZTE=
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Success! The third archived URL works, but it doesn't seem very useful, though. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:38, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified