Talk:David Gregory (journalist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	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]

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.

Well, I wrote the temp page, just for fun. My first try. Most info from bio at Leading Authorities. http://www.leadingauthorities.com/search/biography.htm?s=17527. There is an image here but I was not sure about copyright infringement. http://www.carlcoxphoto.com/images/David%20Gregory.jpg

• Temp page has replaced the main article. RedWolf 03:45, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

I think it's remarkable that even the MRC named him best White House correspondent; I didn't know that. What a brave journalist, despite what some would say. -Amit

[edit] Imus Transcript

The Drudge transcript is clearly wrong. I've fixed it up a bit to match the audio and video clips I've seen. Should we still cite Drudge as the source? Should we even include the transcript? --Geedubber 23:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Found full audio of the phone call here. will fix transcript later tonight.--Geedubber 01:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

This page is biased. needs to be wikified

[edit] POV

This article is little more than a transcript of White House complaints about Gregory. I'm going to work on expanding the serious info and removing some of the excess. Gamaliel 03:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I am not so sure of this criticism. When I read this article I did not feel that Gregory having disputes with the White House necessarily reflected poorly upon him, he is a journalist after all. The complaints from the White House about Gregory are of the ad hominem variety and therefore, not that convincing. Also, if the conservative media watchdog gives him an award and now the Bush administration hates him, then one could argue that he is doing his job. So, in the end, I still felt able to make up my own mind on the subject. Moomot 15:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that some of this stuff needs to be removed. Fully half of the article is given over to some of the more "contentious" elements in Gregory's career, i.e. the confrontation with W., the argument with McClellan, and the Imus incident. This kind of thing is really more in the nature of a footnote, or maybe a link; it doesn't deserve to be half the article -- is this Wikipedia or is this Wonkette? 68.93.120.212 05:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)From the original author of the temp page, who is still too lazy to sign up for an actual account.

Instead of removing it, why not add more positive items to balance out the POV? I hate it when Wiki takes things out. I depend on Wiki to give me a starting point for research, and knowing more about any subject, positive, neutral, or negative, makes my job much easier.66.8.139.9 18:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)