Talk:Editorial board at The Wall Street Journal

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Editorial board at The Wall Street Journal article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 August 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state)
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Climate change Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Failed verification claim

@Bill Williams: you have removed material as unsourced along with the supporting source[1], have you indeed looked on pages 244-245 of Merchants of doubt : how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming and verified that this information is not there? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that the WSJ editorial board rejects climate change is unsourced, unless you can provide a source along with the quote stating this. The source that I removed was irrelevant to this article, it was referring to an op-ed that wasn't written by the editorial board, yet the article was quoting it as if the editorial board made the article. Bill Williams 17:43, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I indeed read those pages, and I suggest you should as well, because it simply says that one man named Arthur Robinson wrote one article one time, nothing relating to the editorial board, which is what this article is about. Bill Williams 17:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would, but I don't have access to those pages in the free preview. Was this an article for the editorial board or for the news side of the paper? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was an op-ed, not news, but not the editorial board, just an opinion writer unaffiliated with the WSJ. My point is you can't add things to the article without verifying them, which I did by simply changing the pages on the link to "244" in the URL, [2]. There have been thousands of op-eds that are irrelevant to this article, so putting that in here is extremely misleading. Columnists and Commentary is specifically listed separately from Editorials in the WSJ [3]. Bill Williams 18:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Columnists, criticism, commentary, and editorials are all the purview of the Editorial Board... Either its News Room side or its Editorial Board side. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is completely false, you have no evidence that the Editorial Board somehow magically writes every op-ed. The article is about the Editorial Board, not the thousands of opinion editors over time. The Editorial Board does not write op-eds, and you have no evidence that they approve of any either. [4] the op-eds are edited and approved of by Paul Gigot, not the Editorial Board. Bill Williams 18:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody said that the Editorial Board writes everything it publishes. The Opinion Editor (currently Paul Gigot) is the head of the Editorial Board. You're arguing in circles. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He is not the head of the editorial board [5], he is simply the senior editor of the editorial pages. The editorial board is separate from him and from the authors of various op-eds published. There is a difference between "editorials," which the WSJ refers to things written by the editorial board, and "op-eds", which the WSJ refers to articles written by guests. Bill Williams 19:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My point is the opinions of the editorial board and the articles they publish are irrelevant to Paul Gigot approving of various different opinion articles, so claiming that the WSJ editorial board supports something because an opinion article was published by an outside editor is absurd. The outside editors hold their own independent opinions of the WSJ editorial board. Bill Williams 19:06, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, what does that have to do with covering the opinion articles by outside editors published by the Board? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not published by the board. Do you have any source that states the Board is in charge of publishing all op-eds? Because from what I'm seeing that's the duty of different editors, not the board as a whole. Bill Williams 19:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Every single article I've been reading to verify what you're saying has stated that editorial boards as a whole do not approve of every article on the op-ed page, only that editors do. Bill Williams 19:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We do not currently have articles for the different opinion side editors, we cover the whole editorial board here. Your argument makes no sense, even if it is an individual board member who has control we would still cover it here unless an article is made for that editorial position (in which case it would still need to be covered here to some extent even if the primary coverage is there). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The entire editorial board approves of the articles written by "the editorial board". Only the opinion editors approve of op-eds that are written, not the entire editorial board, so representing op-eds as the editorial board is insanely misleading. Not every opinion editor is a member of the editorial board. Bill Williams 12:49, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whats your point? Either way we cover them all here unless you want to make daughter pages. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:03, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you read further on the editorial pages articles, they clearly state that editors submit their own opinions as op-eds, not the opinions of the board, which does not have to approve of their opinions, and often publishes opinions that it disagrees with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Williams (talk • contribs) 18:57, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]