Talk:MyDD

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on October 30, 2005. The result of the discussion was removed from afd, sent to talk page. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Contents 1 Sources? 2 Chris Bowers 3 What does myDD mean? 4 Logo 5 2006 Midterms 6 Origins in astrology and day trading

[edit] Sources?

I removed this bit from the article: MyDD shot to fame during the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election by being the first major news source to break the exit polls. ^{[citation needed]}. The "source" provided under external links just goes to a page on mydd.com. Are there any reliable (third-party) sources for this claim? Friday (talk) 16:37, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Bowers

Chris Bowers was on Afd, but it was closed with non consensus, but several people mentioned a merge. His only claim to fame was being "a blogger" for MyDD. "A blogger" doesn't sound too significant. Do they have only one blogger, or hundreds of them? If he's the main guy behind the site, his name should be mentioned here, but if not, I don't see much need for it. Friday (talk) 17:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What does myDD mean?

I'm curious, what does myDD mean? Does DD stand for something?

Doh! Just looked at the title bar: MyDD :: Due Diligence of Politics...

[edit] Logo

My DD recently changed their logo - could we get the current version of the logo up on the page?

[edit] 2006 Midterms

Added a section on 2 campaigns being run out of MyDD which have garnered prominent media attention. CNN even covered the googlebomb one on Wolf Blitzer yesterday. The article needs restructuring too, but I confess I know little of how to go about such things on Wiki. --FNV 18:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origins in astrology and day trading

It's fairly common knowledge that MyDD started out as an astrology/day trading site, both on the main domain and a subdomain, astroworld.mydd.com. Although Jerome Armstrong deleted all the initial content after it become a pure political site, I don't think he's ever denied it. For some reason people keep deleting this information from the article. Why is that? That fact is at least as noteworthy, and well-documented, as most of the rest of the article. Korny O'Near 18:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

You've not cited anything which is one problem. Right now this is original and unverified research. IrnBru001 21:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Fine - here's a cite at the National Journal blog. And here's an archived page from MyDD. Is either of those good enough? Korny O'Near 03:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah NJ article is a good source, but your edits must reflect the content of that source. It seems Jerome says "Down that line, I dabbled with planets and predictions in the most abstract manner, as one of several different predictive mathematical disciplines ... It has nothing to do with what I consult with in online political strategy." so that would not support the claim that the blog was started as an astrology blog. The neutral pov understanding of this source still does not support your proposed edit, but only a statement of a claim by RWV. That statement I would suggest is not important enough for this article. IrnBru001 19:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

That's not a denial by Armstrong; he's talking about his current consulting, not his past blogging. Korny O'Near 23:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)