Talk:Tony Snow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
 |
Tony Snow is within the scope of WikiProject Kentucky, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Template Usage] [Watch Project Articles] [Project Talk] | |
| A | This article has been rated as A-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project's importance scale. | |
 |
Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page. | |
[edit] Clean-up
media reports suggest, Tony Snow is likely to succeed Scott McClellan as White House Press Secretary.
This means that he will take on a much higher profile and this article needs to reflect that.
Right now it looks like an indiscriminate cut and paste job of various columns he has written, and it needs some major work.--RWR8189 03:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Controversial?
I haven't edited this page because someone, very quickly, has clearly put in a good effort to reflect the changed magnitude of the article and the salient issues. However...
"Snow was a controversial choice for the role."
To whom was it a controversial choice? From my limited reading of CNN and Fox News' web sites over the past week, it was an extremely predictable choice and one, given Snow's moderate conservatism, undoubtedly easy and reassuring presence on camera, strong media links, past service of President George HW Bush, and so on, that was NOT controversial in the slightest.
IT WAS CONTROVERSIAL BECAUSE FOX NEWS IS A GOP PROPAGANDA MACHINE. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.86.228.221 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC).
"Unusually, he came from a newsmedia background." the article continues, before confirming that Presidents of both parties have drawn press secretaries from current media positions: "Snow joins Bill Moyers, who had a show on PBS in the 1950s before joining the Lyndon B. Johnson Administration in 1967, and Ron Nessen, an NBC News Correspondent before being tapped as Nixon's Press Secretary, as men pulled from the media to work for the government."
Just a couple of thoughts, but I leave it to you to judge their validity.
Not much validity there. Bill Moyers joined the Kennedy Administration in 1961. By 1967 he was out of the Johnson Administration and he could not have worked at PBS prior to this stint in government BECAUSE IT DID NOT EXIST. PBS WAS CREATED DURING THE JOHNSON ADMINISTRATION!
- Good catch there, unnamed IP editor. Danthemankhan 17:56, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV?
There's a fair amount of stuff he's been accused of that's been omitted from this article: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Snow_Racism_no_longer_a_big_0426.html
DNC calls at least one of those fact: http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/04/tony_snow_clip.php
They should either be acknowledged, squashed as myth, or referenced as a rumor. IMHO the article is clearly NPOV for failing to do so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.250.207.102 (talk • contribs) .
- The great thing about Wikipedia is that if you think an article is missing something, you can add it.--RWR8189 20:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Attempts to insert defamatory Democratic partisan talking points in this article will be vigorously resisted. 172 | Talk 22:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Just for the record partisan talking points from both sides will be deleted. --Hamiltonian 23:09, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- If these really is a fake video, it should be clearly noted. Otherwise it should be noted he's been critized for his comments in the past.
[edit] No Quotes?
I was surprised to find that there was no link to Wikiquotes from this page. It seems fairly hard for me to believe that someone who worked as an anchor for a cable news channel for a number of years wouldn't have said anything quotable.--Dragonstrider 20:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yeah, something's really fishy about this article. I mean, the guy made headlines for using the phrase "tar baby" in a press briefing and that's conveniently left out? He recently alluded to Helen Thomas' Lebanese ancestry in the context of a briefing about the Israel/Lebanon conflict by saying sarcastically "Thank you Helen, for the Hezbollah point of view." Unbelievable hubris and disrespect considering Thomas has been in that Thomas has been in that room doing her job since Mr. Snow was in diapers. And these are by no means the only examples of his bombastic remarks. Should we not be allowed to add any information about what Snow says as the mouthpiece of the administration? Direct quotes voiced from his position as White House Press Secretary are not relevant but a paragraph about his cover band, Beats Workin', somehow is? How awful.
-
- Also 172, in keeping with Wikipedia's standards of objectivity, I agree with your notion and hope this article doesn't ever become an edit war between political partisans, though I must admit I find odd and somewhat offensive the implication that any criticism of Snow (or reportage thereof) be automatically characterized as "democratic talking points." Its completely reasonable to include some of the bizarre and outlandish things the man has said because they are well-discussed in the public at large and they are relevant to any description of Snow. And, as an aside: being anything but a Republican does not make one a Democrat.Inoculatedcities
[edit] "A constantly shifting band of domestic animals"?
That's the weirdest thing I've seen on Wikipedia today, and I just finished reading the Lolicon article. I think this whole thing could use a quick review to shake out some of the glowing admiration. --MattShepherd 20:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, somebody changed it! Cool. --MattShepherd 15:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] think progress
Surely we can get a better list of Snow's less than complimentary comments regarding the President than one compiled by what is little more than a virulently anti-Bush blog? Including the think progress compilation looks like little more than free advertising for the site. Tomertalk 23:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] White House Staff?
Is there perhaps an infobox for present white house staff? It seems like it would be at least as useful to connect the man to has co-workers as to connect him with his predecessors.
[edit] The first briefing.
I heard about the "hugging the tar baby" comment on The Daily Show last night, it seems like something noteworthy but maybe it should wait? The New York Times mentioned it in their review of his first at bat in an otherwise positive review[1]--Bobak 18:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] bupkis?
Is it me or is the end of the article incredibly unclear? Die a crib death? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.18.185.135 (talk • contribs).
- I agree that it was terribly written. Oddly enough, it was also stolen! Compare the version in the History to http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/saturdayspin/270907_washcall20.html . Had either situation been the case, I'd have replaced it, so given both at once, I went ahead and re-did that whole section with citations. I know I understand the story much better now than I did before; hopefully others will too. --SuperNova |T|C| 07:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- Can we please please please revise this article so it doesn't read like a profile written by the White House or Fox News? This is ridiculous. Inoculatedcities 16:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "US didnt start the war"-tony snow
at this years conservative political action conference he said "we didnt create the war in iraq".... this deserves a mention on this page
[edit] Mr. Snow's Cancer
There is a huge fight going on with wikipedia's John Edwards page that finally may have stabilized for now...whew
Three very frequent contributors were very forceful about deleting what I thought were factually correct remarks about Mrs. Edwards' cancer. In summary, I think they felt that there should be no language regarding public education or cancer awareness. Phrases along the line of 20% survival after 5 years were strenously objected to.
In contrast, there was language here that has nothing to do with Mr. Snow, only the disease prognosis being very bad. Whatever the prognosis data is only relates to the disease, not to Mr. Snow, at least that's along the same line of logic as the 3 people at the John Edwards' article.
My feeling is that language about how bad the disease is not really relevant except it's relevant in Mrs. Edwards case because they go overboard in painting a rosy picture. They said that it is "completely curable" and compared it to diabetes. I think that's very deceptive and potentially harmful to patient safety because it gives a false picture of the seriousness of the disease. If Mr. Snow said "My cancer is completely treatable, not much different from diabetes as far as always having to live with it..I will continue to work....and work a lot, maybe only being a little tired, sometimes" then I think a disclaimer is needed. I don't think he said anything like that.
As a compromise, I've toned down the prognosis language in the Mr. Snow article. However, I did keep in some prognosis language. What do you think?Dereks1x 00:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Just a brief note to point out that, again, you're confusing original research with POV (based on your edit summary to this article). (1) Your motivation to "raise cancer awareness" is no more appropriate here than at the Edwards article, as it is soapboxing, and (2) connecting cancer prognosis from an unrelated source to a particular case (whether Snow or Edwards or Santa Claus) without a source that already does so is original research of the synthesis variety. All that to say, the article should not give a prognosis unless a source has done so for Mr. Snow specifically. · j e r s y k o talk · 01:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Jersyko. I'll fix it and remove the prognosis judgement, the provided links didn't really address that except to say the situation was "very serious". That could mean anything. Let's wait for specific sources, thanks ;)
[edit] Recent vandalism
I strongly advocate the semi-protection of this article, especially in light of people writing their "condolences" and other silliness. Additionally, it would prevent the problem this article is currently having with User talk:158.123.132.2. Ironiridis 20:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ironiridis: To request semi-protection on a page you would go to WP:RFPP. But the 158.123.132.2 problem looks to have stopped for now. Tvoz | talk 20:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Well, as part of accepted practice, I was trying to start discussion rather than simply ask for it. I agree that the problem seems to have stopped. Ironiridis 21:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The 'Music' Section
Is everything under the 'Music' heading true!? If so, I take back some of the stuff I've said about Mr. Snow. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anoma lee (talk • contribs) 08:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] TONY SNOW AND COLONOSCOPY PRIOR TO CANCER FINDING
Did Tony Snow discover the cancer as a result of a colonoscopy or did he have it when he was diagnosed? I am curious whether it was discovered as a result of having had this most important test. No one seems to have written a word about it.
