Talk:David McCullough

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David McCullough article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
David McCullough is part of WikiProject Pittsburgh, which is building a comprehensive guide to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and its metropolitan area on Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit the attached article, join or discuss the project.

Editors are currently needed to tag Pittsburgh-related articles with {{pghproj}}.

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
blackngold29 (talk · contribs)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.

Contents

[edit] Narration

I'm not a writer -- would love mention of his narration skills (most notably The Civil War on PBS). Anybody up to it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samwisebruce (talkcontribs).

[edit] HBO Miniseries

I just found out, per a poster in the U.S. Post Office, that HBO will air a 7-part miniseries based on David McCullough's book, "John Adams," beginning Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 2000 (8 P.M.) HBO: John Adams Pooua (talk) 02:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Time Inc. career

David McCullough began his career at TIME Inc. in a way well-trod by others before him: working at FYI, the in-house organ announcing promotions and career moves. These two clips show the function of the old FYI within the company:[1] [2]. FYI used to be the training ground for new recruits to the company. Regards,MarmadukePercy (talk) 16:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re-write

I am currently doing a re-write in my sandbox anyone and everyone is welcome to help. If there is something that you would like to see included, but don't want to write out please leave a note on my talk page. Thank You! Blackngold29 01:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

My overhaul of his life is complete. Next I am moving onto the awards section and a writing style section. Both can be found in my sandbox, all help is welcome. Thank you. Blackngold29 05:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Introduction Revision

It appears that the current introduction to DMcC's article lavishes more praise on its subject than would be warranted by any reputable encyclopedia. In the interest of saving wikipedia from this pernicious trend of substituting hagiography for biography, I propose tempering some of these overly congratulatory remarks with other more sobering facts about the man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bosfeld (talkcontribs) 21:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I felt that an important part of his life was that he has recieved high praise for basically everything he has written. There has been some critisism, but it was very few and far between. The intro should serve as partially say to why he's notable; which is because he is such a high praised author. I won't take offense to any praise that is removed, but I would not like anyone to remove it, simply for the sake of removing it. Blackngold29 21:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Certainly McCullough's success as an author is one of the primary sources of his notability with respect to the general public. However, he is also remarkable for the fact that he stands as a controversial figure to many historians for reasons largely stemming from this public notoriety. The manner in which he presents historical fact to lay readers evidently has touched off a great debate amongst historians and educators over issues concerning writing for the public. Also his publicly recognized position as a 'celebrity historian' along with Doris Kearns Goodwin and the late Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. has continued to be a cause for concern for historians for professional reasons and for the fact that he disavowals ever having been an actual historian. Although I believe mentioning at length his career as a writer, including the accolades he's received because of it, is important for introductory purposes, I also believe that we would be remiss in ignoring this ambivalent position he holds as a 'historian'. Bosfeld —Preceding comment was added at 00:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

McCullough does not consider himself as a historian, merely an author who writes about history; I forget the interview he said that in but it's out there somewhere. I have no problem with adding these controveries (it would actually be good as far as being fair complete coverage goes) as long as they come from good sources. Blackngold29 05:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair points have been made here, but keep one thing in mind: it is not about what we think of McCullough, or even what he thinks of himself. Rather, it is about what reliable, third-party sources say about him. faithless (speak) 06:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)