Talk:Bill Plante

Certain

A particular editor seems to be expanding this article beyond what is needed.Defcool1 (talk) 07:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

"beyond what is needed" – you do realize there are no word/character count limits in Wikipedia, don't you? I could take this article to good or featured status if I wanted to and there's nothing you can do about it. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Defcool1: I've recommended to Bloom6132 on my user talk page that everyone calm down, stop edit warring and discuss the issues here. As a started, please could you detail your specific objections to the text that Bloom6132 has added? As they say above, "expanding this article beyond what is needed" is not a reason to remove valid cited text. There are reasons not to make articles too long, as detailed at WP:ARTICLESIZE, but that certainly doesn't apply here - the recommended point to start splitting or curtailing an article is between 60,000 and 100,000 characters of readable prose while this article only currently has 3,770 characters which is really on the short side. So I'd like to see more details on what specifically you don't like about the additions. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I took a look at the contested edits and am neutral on the debate (granted, I'm also unfamiliar with the subject), but I will say that content about his being the press corps "sommelier" and bungee jumping in New Zealand is trivial and adds nothing encyclopedic to the article. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 17:10, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@Beemer69: The information does not contravene the four points in WP:INDISCRIMINATE. The fact that both CBS News and The Washington Post obituaries mention his penchant for wine (not to mention the The New York Times in 1989 and The Wall Street Journal in 1999) should make it notable enough to include. Granted, an entire (sub)section on his passion for wine would be WP:UNDUE, but is two sentences really too much? —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm with Bloom6132, the disputed material is well-sourced and adds interesting context to an article that is hardly overlong. Furthermore: Locking the article down seems to me to be a questionable admin overreaction, especially considering the recent death and current WP:ITN and WP:DYK nominations of the subject, which prevents timely editing. If there's an edit war, there's a noticeboard for that, or an admin should hand out short blocks if disruption continues after warnings. Jusdafax (talk) 20:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree. The lock seems unwarranted. Thriley (talk) 23:43, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I have made a direct request on the locking admin's Talk page. Jusdafax (talk) 01:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jusdafax: the protection was applied because there was a huge edit war going on at the time. Accusing the admin who stepped in to stop that of overreacting is absurd. This process gives us the time to discuss rationally what we should do with the disputed edits and come to a consensus, something that is happening above. It should not be lifted prematurely. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:22, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

The admin agreed, the protection was lifted, and the article worked on and posted in a timely manner at ITN, so I strongly disagree with your pinged characterization of my objections to the total article lockdown as "absurd." Perhaps, as an admin, you will act on the comment below which violates Wikipedia policy on personal attacks. Jusdafax (talk) 20:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Out of place, you are attacking. Defcool1 (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Find a new crusade, maybe someone will join. Defcool1 (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

To whomever is interested, Bloom goes on these "campaigns" and "builds" articles so they can have credit for them, etc. Not only is it "ambulance chasing" but it's highly amateurish.Defcool1 (talk) 20:02, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Interesting comment, coming from an editor with under 100 edits. I strongly suggest you read and understand WP:NPA which concerns the "no personal attacks" policy at Wikipedia, and then strike your comment and walk away. In my view, your attack here is actionable. Jusdafax (talk) 20:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  No comment.Defcool1 (talk) 21:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Didn't realize we're being all PC here. As if there needs to be elaboration. Wikipedia has something called feature articles, also good articles. Anyone who tries to debate this topic is attacked. Patently freaky! Defcool1 (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

The only thing "patently freaky" is your inability to accept the overwhelming consensus, both against your edits and your WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Admins don't have much interest in resolving the question of why or whether double spacing sentences is proper. If it is why? When is it used? Why is there very little discussion about the topic?Defcool1 (talk) 05:55, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

It's clearly set out in MOS:DOUBLESPACE (if you didn't catch that, it's indeed acceptable to use double-spacing). I'm frankly not surprised that you still don't accept it with your WP:ICANTHEARYOU attitude. —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 13:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Bill Plante was the White House press corps' unofficial sommelier during his three decades as CBS News' senior White House correspondent? Source: The Washington Post; CBS News
  • ALT1: ... that before bungee jumping with White House aides in New Zealand, senior White House correspondent Bill Plante said he was "proving that you're never too old to do something really stupid"? Source: The Washington Post
  • Reviewed: Justus H. Rathbone
  • Comment: Eligible per Rule 1d, because it is only appeared in the "Recent Deaths" section of ITN and not as a bold link.

5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:33, 29 September 2022 (UTC).

• Plante had such a legendary career and one of the best baritone news voices ever. The above may be more catchy, but they overlook what made Plante great. Since most younger readers haven't a clue who Plante was, or what made him worthy of remembrance, I offer the following as an option:

• alt2 Source: here

What? Saying Plante had a booming voice is inaccurate. The CBS article cited says Plante had a baritone voice. Being catchy is not a good idea here.Defcool1 (talk) 00:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

What? The article says both baritone and booming. ("He was known for his baritone voice, which he used to launch questions from afar. . . . He'll be remembered for his reports from the White House lawn, his booming voice that presidents always answered and his kind heart.") And since when is "being catchy ... not a good idea"? Cbl62 (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cbl62: just ignore him. He's been trolling this article (and only this article) non-stop for the past 10 days, despite having a grand total of 116 edits to his name. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Cbl62, here is an answer to your question. One, Lesley Stahl is not an authority on anything. She's well-respected sure. Stahl says he had a booming voice BUT she is referencing presidential press conferences. He did not have a booming voice on newscasts, that is for certain. You are wrong to use this as a description not to mention Bloom is way out of line with many things they do. Two, the number of edits someone or a user makes means nothing. You or Bloom or whoever else go on assuming about that... Three, the Plante article like numerous other GA, FA, and the like articles are edited in not only an incorrect but even juvenile or youthful ways. Four, things you, Cbl62, are assuming are similarly in error. I don't have much hope that you are willing to listen and have zero faith Bloom will. Bloom should focus on the Wiki Bowl and forget the silly stuff.Defcool1 (talk) 08:13, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Actual review needed (as opposed to the trolling WP:NOTHERE comments above). —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:38, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I shall review this. Schwede66 03:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

• newness = recent expansion
• length = just long enough, even when the quotes are subtracted
• content = I note that he was appointed Senior White House Correspondent in 1986 and he retired in 2016. He therefore did not hold that role for 35 years as stated in the article.
• sourced = nice work
• neutral = no concerns
• plagiarismfree = Did you copy from Find a Grave or did Find a Grave from the WP article? As far as I can see, the Find a Grave page was set up on 29 September 2022 (when his death was announced) and at the same time, the article was expanded. My assumption is that the Find a Grave entry as a copy of a particular version of the WP article but would be good to hear from you that that is indeed the case. I'm assuming that smiletimegh.com is a WP mirror. Earwig's first newspaper source (the Washington Post obituary) shows 21% similarity and they are all phrases that are fine.
• policyother = Since a trouble maker was blocked, it's been a stable article.
• hookcited = yes (but ALT2 is factually wrong)
• hookinterest = I find ALT1 most interesting and suggest that bungee jumping be wikilinked. ALT0 would also work but only if sommelier is wikilinked (I suspect it's too much of a specialised term that many people would know what that actually is. With regards to ALT2, he wasn't a "Senior White House Correspondent" for 35 years (I note that the hook talks about "White House Correspondent" but in the article, the title "Senior" is used) but apart from that, it's too convoluted to make a good hook. I've struck it.
• qpq = done
• status = Needs clarification on plagiarism. Schwede66 04:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

• @Schwede66: thanks for the review. I did not even know about the Find a Grave copy until you brought it to my attention here. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

• All good. Schwede66 08:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)