Talk:Carl Cameron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 This page has been sanitized by employees of Fox News 2 Why was he canned from Fox? 3 Name Change? 4 POV edit 5 Original Research 6 Vandalism notices

[edit] This page has been sanitized by employees of Fox News

See [1] and note the IP address which points to Fox news, intentionally removing documented information from Wiki that is unbecoming. [2]

Would you please sign your remark ? Would you also, please explain why you think this sorry piece of junk of an article complies with WP:BLP ? Does your proposed revert really improve in this regard ? Wefa 21:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC) (updated)

Well, since nobody tries to own up top this crap, I'll at least try to give it some proper structure. Wefa 12:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, now this page has been "sanitized" by me. I moved the references into an own section and threw out the Bias allegation details - you can look them up from the references. I also moved in a sentnce or two from his Fox biography. Unfortunately, this is still borderline quality for a biographic article. My edit was purely formal - I know next to nothing about the guy and just rearranged the already given information. Someone with more info should at least give some more biographic detail (hint to those Fox News noses - get yourself a real account and add real data, instead of just deleting stuff) Wefa 13:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I will remove the reference to the bootlegged pre-interview tape. A bootlegged tape with off-the-record material is by definition not part of Cameron's journalistic work and thus can not be quoted in a section dealing with allegations of biased reporting. To put it more bluntly, Cameron's political opinion is not subject of this criticism and not subject of a wikipedia article. It is only relevant if and when it substantially influences his published body of work. This seems to be not the case in this reference. Wefa 19:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Another entry on the sanitizing front: I just reverted an edit by user:Dachannien: there is already chapter on criticism of Bias. The chapter whose heading he changed from "Fraud"to "Bias" is about allegations of journalistic fraud, and, such, appropriately named. Furthermore mediamatters.org is appropriately linked, so it is completely redundant and POV to inject a diminuitive descriptions of them. I'll try to reintroduce the foxnews link to the article in some form. Dachannien: please explain why you think your changes are/were necessary. Wefa 16:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

No good deed goes unpunished. I had kept/reincluded Dachannien's Fox news article link without actually reading the article. Now I scanned it. It does not contain the words "apology" or "fabricated". It does not mention Carl Cameron. It does not contribute to the understanding of the subject. I removed the link again - this wikipedia article is about Carl Cameron, not Fox News. Wefa 16:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I again removed the reference to the pre-interview tape. If you think this needs to be in this article, please explain why. See my comments above wrt that matter. Wefa 21:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why was he canned from Fox?

I'm hearing he was fired from Fox after he tried to perform an ongoing investigation into the Israeli Mossad spies in America that appeared to have had foreknowledge of the 911 attacks. Would anyone dare to clear up WHY he was fired from Fox here? Just curious. Cowicide 14:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

- eh, he wasn't fired --75.84.196.46 01:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

That's right. he DID get caught fabricating a story that tried to frame some Israeli art students as "Mossad" agents. But he wasn't fired.

interesting issue. Is there any quotable writeup about the Israeli Art Students controversy that substantially details Cameron's journalistic involvement ? Wefa 13:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name Change?

An anonymous user changed the article to claim Cameron were born "Karl Lamberg" and later changed his name to Cameron. Only reference given is a highschool web site that has Cameron's enail address listed as the contact for a "Karl Lamberg". Given the author is anonymous and this could be easily faked or be a prank I'll revert it. If anybody can cite better sources on this and wants to add his name to that we should discuss putting it in again. Wefa 00:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV edit

I'll remove the diminuitive qualifications from the critique section. The references given provide exact info who levels those criticism, and injecting them (especially in that form) in the text only serves to devalue them, which would be POV. I also dislike the tons of generic links inserted into the article by the same user, and have asked him to explain here via his talk page. Wefa (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Since we have not seen any reaction, I'll remove the worst offenders in this regard now Wefa (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I just again removed such an edit by Thehallman. The links given already show exactly who levels which critique, and inserting diminuitive descriptions into the Text is POV. @Thehallman : if you think your edit should be in the article, please explain why. Wefa (talk) 20:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research

The chapter "Conflict of interest" (added by user:76.114.85.60) contains criticism without citing a source for the criticism. While such criticism, if made quotably elsewhere, might be appropriately mentioned here, this here seems to be original research. What do you think ? I'm currently inclined to remove that paragraph again.Wefa (talk) 02:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

User:SquelchBot removed a paragraph under bias containing a youtube link. The reason is probably the link itself, which may or may not violate Wikipedia policy. I really have no idea. But I do know I would have removed that link myself, because it was pure original research.

Folks, please, this is not the GOP party journal, and it's also not Carl Cameron's rap sheet. This article is in need of some solid information; what it doesn't need is GOP fanboys showing it to the eevil libruls, and what it also doesn't need is leftwing folks who think WP is the place to showcase their particular soapbox. Thank You. Wefa (talk) 20:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm still unhappy with that Conflict of Interest section. I don't like it but have not yet found an appropriate form to improve it. Wefa (talk) 21:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism notices

An anonymous Comcast user, probably from the Boston area, removed the whole criticism section. I reverted both his edits Wefa (talk) 19:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)