Talk:The Reagans

message: I think my copyedit will do--I mostly removed a redundant sentence. One real question, and one less serious one. The real one is, who are the scriptwriters? Are they out homosexuals? (Or is this the old anti-Hollywood gay-baiting.)
Less seriously, if I claimed that any movie or television program starring someone who is married to a GOP donor was inherently biased, I'd be justly laughed down. Why does anyone think the equivalent attack on Brolin is reasonable?Vicki Rosenzweig 02:56, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's an AP story on the current controversy:  It has some information that could be incorporated in this article.  About casting Brolin, the story says it this way: "Casting James Brolin, husband of outspoken liberal Barbra Streisand, as Reagan is a deliberately provocative move, [critics] contend."  The wording in this article at least needs to be fixed, if not removed entirely. -- Minesweeper 07:20, Oct 30, 2003 (UTC)
Ed: I think you've un-NPOVed it. Is the Drudge Report really a sensible source to quote? From a UK perspective I find the whole argument completely bizarre. If they have got someone with AIDS in the family does that really make them biased? The whole thing seems excessively defensive. Secretlondon 16:31, Nov 4, 2003 (UTC)
----
Since 2 people have questioned my neutrality (I just read the talk page for the first time this very minute), I will stop editing The Reagans for a while. --[Ed]
===Dropped Link===
I dropped this link:
*Ronald Reagan: a target for Hollywood? - Jim Rutenberg, New York Times (balanced)
It no longer goes to the article: normal practice for newspaper websites is to move articles to paid archives after a certain amount of time. Ellsworth 23:43, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyedit

message: I dropped this link:
*Ronald Reagan: a target for Hollywood? - Jim Rutenberg, New York Times (balanced)
It no longer goes to the article: normal practice for newspaper websites is to move articles to paid archives after a certain amount of time. Ellsworth 23:43, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dropped Link

message: The article says it's a four-hour miniseries.  The DVD I got from Netflix says it's three hours long.  Which is it? --Micahbrwn 16:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Time?

message: The sentence contradicts itself
:one of Reagan's daughters, no family members, or close friends ... were consulted 
I think the sentence meant
:none of Reagaon's ...
Since family covers daughters I replaced it with
:no family member or close friend ... was consulted
NYCDA 18:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  one of Reagan's daughters deleted from A Controversial LIne Excised 

message: I deleted the link again... I see no reason why a link to a Right wing opinion column that simply claims "Liberals are Hypocrites" has anything to do with this article.  If anyone has an objection and a reason for inclusion, I will not object SirChuckB (talk) 05:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dropping it again

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Reagans. 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://web.archive.org/web/20100408090005/https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/QQ/Views/Exhibit/narrative/aids.html to https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/QQ/Views/Exhibit/narrative/aids.html
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) 14:35, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified