Jump to content

Talk:Lionel (radio personality)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clean Up Tense Project

[edit]

As the WOR Radio show concluded this evening, someone can go through and change all references to WOR to the past tense now. The final show for WOR aired tonight. I guess we'll have a vacation break from Lionel until his Air America launch on the 14th. -- --Wny 03:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

[edit]

"he quickly posted the biggest ratings in station history"

Does somebody have a source for the above?

My recollection is that when Lionel was at WFLA, he wasn't the highest-rated talk show host at WFLA until at least 1989, after Bob Lassiter left for Chicago. And that was a year after Lionel started at FLA, so just how quickly did he post the biggest ratings in station history (if in fact he did)? Msclguru 23:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Data from WFLA (AM)page that belongs here: Radio talk show host "Lionel" actually got his start at WFLA. He was a regular call in participant on a number of WFLA's shows in the 1980's and was subsequently invited to host his own talk show on WFLA as a result of impressing WFLA radio management. After his wildly successful stint in Tampa, he was hired by a radio station in the top US market, New York and his program ultimately syndicated. -- ∞Wirelain 02:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why does someone keep deleting the section about Lionel's crew? Derm, Doob, and Juice were a HUGE part of the show!, and Dougatz, Miggs, and Pete are a huge part of the show now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.185.17 (talk) 17:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody know what happened to the original AAR crew? one day AL B was gone, then the rest.

A/V Sources???

[edit]

What is one supposed to use for sources? Do we post links to audio clips stored in wikimedia? Would such audio clips be considered "fair use"? Jeh 02:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know how to source something when it's a generality, across many episodes, such as theme music which was used for a while but no longer, or his signature sign off statement which is in all of his commentary-opinion videos, but not special appearances or interviews. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 04:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quote In Search Engine Reveals Echo Chamber

[edit]

I've searched but can't find the original source, other than all Lionel's sites, other site promotions of his appearances, and all YouTube pages. I'm assuming it was in print but not online or somehow archived unsearchable. I emailed Newsweek and hope they'll either cite it here or email it to me.

Newsweek described Lionel as “[a]n intellectual known for his irreverent political and social humor.”[citation needed]

~ JasonCarswell (talk) 06:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They emailed me back and I'm shocked to learn their archives only go back to 2013. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Corbett-Lionel Law

[edit]

Can part of "The Corbett-Lionel Law" be restored? It got longer than it probably should have, but being so important I think that it's at least worth retaining a shorter version.

Also, if critical rational heads, Lionel and Sibel Edmonds have Wikipedia pages, James Corbett not only deserves a Wikipedia page (my draft was rejected) but to be included/accessible/promoted as much as anyone. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Alarmist"?

[edit]

I stated that Lionel was an "unregulated cyber-surveillance and deep state alarmist" in the introductory paragraph but it was removed. I tried to keep the wording short. Looking at it now it could be taken negatively. It's mentioned in "Lionel's Law" but is it possible to include something regarding this important issue up there? ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 22:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pizza Rat & Chewbacca Mom

[edit]

Lionel brilliantly and hilariously repeatedly references Pizza Rat and Chewbacca Mom, rather than call the ignorant distracted hypnotized masses "sheeple". I don't know how best to include this. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 22:47, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't the purpose of an article like this to document every witty thing the subject says, but rather to give the reader an overview. A good guideline for inclusion is whether a third party has mentioned it, e.g. in a review article. Individual items of article content don't have to be Wiki-notable (see WP:N), that is for article topics. But they should be significant with regard to the article subject. The rest should likely go on a fan page, maybe a Wikia page, where citation, notability, etc. requirements are practically nil. Jeh (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fall 2016 modifications

[edit]
  1. I moved so I've been away a bit but before that I uploaded a screengrab October 16 2016 which was taken down because it didn't have proper permissions. It's a whole ordeal. I don't have a photo or permission (yet). I hope Lionel does it himself.
  2. November 8 2016 someone removed the following which is clearly relevant and prevalent in many of his rants, perhaps not in those exact words. I've parked it here until he brings it up again so I can properly cite it.
    Libertarian has all too often been coöpted by those espousing personal freedoms while ignoring many of the draconian and crypto-austerity features of Austrian School policies.[according to whom?][relevant?]
  3. User Boleyn has purged/censored Wikipedia of all James Corbett (journalist) links on this Lionel article, Sibel Edmonds, etc. I don't know if it's because I re-submitted a draft article yesterday which will take 2-3 weeks to review, or because of the recent (fake) controversy about "fake news" and everything related to this Corbett Report video and dynamic comment sections on YouTube and here: https://www.corbettreport.com/what-i-learned-from-the-propornot-propaganda-list/ as well as the almost identical James Corbett article on Rational Wiki, where I posted it after being censored on Wikipedia where you can go on and on and on about Pokemon but not alternative "fringe" news that speaks truth about power. I suspect that either reason sparked Boleyn to purge what were (temporarily) dead links (that I'll have to hunt down and re-link later). ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 12:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I'm not sure but I suspect, some of the quotes may have had specific YouTube videos and the times where he said them. (There is no mistake that he made them at some point on YouTube.) Those citations were either removed or were always missing - likely because I started the list but didn't initially think to cite them. Because this is not critical, I am not going looking for them, though I will add them as they come up in new material. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine why such citations would have been removed. But if they were, they'll be in the page history. Jeh (talk) 16:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nice (and surprising) to see someone reads the talk pages. Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to myself. In this case, I kind of was making a note, mostly to myself, to check back later because I was tired when I was adding a quote here and notes on Wikiquote. In October and November I was doing other stuff and I know there were some improvements here, and if in fact something got canned, accidentally or not, that's likely when. I will eventually check, possibly if/when I get more info back from the helpful Wikiquote people, possibly later. It may just be my faulty memory. I am certain I started the quotes list for myself without bothering to make citations, then it seemed like a good idea to add them, and document them better from then on. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fewer than 30 people watching this page or the article, so it's not surprising there isn't much response.
Note that per WP:V, any unsourced material can be challenged and removed. It's generally better to put work-in-progress-with-no-sources on the talk page. Jeh (talk) 21:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't mind me asking, why are you here (responding so quickly)? Are you a fan of Lionel, just a Wikipedia person, or are you watching my posts? I don't mean to sound like I've got lots of fans. I do mean to sound a little paranoid because I've got an article draft I worked hard on that they want to delete because it's got fringe stuff, plus they want to ban me from some topics, or worse, though I haven't bothered with fringe since August when I finally learned some rules and concepts. Maybe this isn't the best place for this discussion though. I can't tell anymore, they've got my head so spun around and paranoid now. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 23:43, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This must be a first - a complaint that I'm responding too quickly. I was a regular listener and sometime caller when he was syndicated from WOR; the AA show was at the wrong time for me. I'm not watching your posts, but I am watching the article here and this talk page. (And I am jetlagged out the wazoo from a recent trip, so don't try to make sense of the times of day when I edit!)
Re your edits - To be frank, I think you're trying to put too much WP:FANCRUFT in here. (Short definition: quotes and other info that other fans will enjoy finding and reading but which don't add encyclopedic value to the article. An extreme example from another milieu would be the compartment number of Captain Kirk's quarters on the Enterprise... or even which deck it was on. Even though it can be referenced by screen shots, it is not of any encyclopedic value. But the number of decks in each section of the ship might be of value, as it helps give a relatable sense of scale.)
An article overloaded with such will often be the target of what we call "deletionists", who will try to get the article deleted. If that fails (it usually does but it costs time and energy to fight it) they will pare the article down to only that which satisfies their most strict interpretations of WP:RS, WP:N, WP:V, etc. I don't want to see the article attacked and minimized in this way, so please read those policies carefully and edit accordingly. Look at WP:NOT while you're at it, especially WP:INFO. Thanks. Jeh (talk) 13:06, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the FANTASTIC info. It's patient folks like you who give me hope in Wikipedia. I never heard of fancruft before but knew of it in a way. Also, I too was getting concerned. Lionel uses those quotes wonderfully, and I thought it was just a few regulars, but now he's adding more here and there. I didn't want it to turn into a Wikiquote best of page, but I also didn't want to let them not be documented at least. Also, I'm helping improve Wikiquote a bit every time. As far as other fancruft, I don't know, I don't recall.
Considering how much of an overwhelming issue things like fancruft and fringe and such are to not only monitor but to limit, keep out, and deny, and how utterly backed up and hopelessly far behind, and how many people really want more than just a short article, I'm surprised they haven't found a compromise. Up there with the other tabs "Article" "Talk" "History" "Edit" etc, imagine if they had a "Other" or "Alternative" or "Fancruft" or "Fringe" tab for every history page, personality, or Star Trek episode. Then again, it might be like putting a mullet on Wikipedia - "business up front, party in the back." ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overhaul

[edit]

I've removed a lot of promotional primary source based original research by JasonCarswell and LionelY2K (who, if not the subject himself, is too much of a fan to reasonably edit the article).

Of the sources left that possibly support notability, we have:

Searching for additional sources, I didn't immediately find anything in news except for his articles on RT (TV network). If someone besides JasonCarswell and LionelY2K can find a profile page (not just a bunch of articles), we could cite that to point out that he writes for RT.

Searching books, I see he's mentioned in:

All of these are from academic publishers (Macmillan Publishers, Random House, Rowman & Littlefield). I'm reviewing them now.

Ian.thomson (talk) 02:42, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deggens would support material like: (quote) "Longtime radio personality," and "practicing attorney turned radio host," "displeased with talk radio's shift to conservatism, even saying that Rush Limbaugh 'Destroyed it.'" That part of the book could be in-depth coverage of Limbaugh, but it doesn't really discuss much about Lebron.
Pierce would support material like: "works for Air America network," "has referred to talk radio as 'the biggest con to be perpetrated ever,' referring to it as pontification and noting that the hosts do not listen to their viewers." Doesn't provide in-depth coverage so much as cite him as a primary source.
Bobbitt would support material like: "Hot talk radio covering political and pop culture topics." It is not significant coverage, just part of a short list of examples of his kind.
This doesn't seem to amount to significant coverage either. Maybe someone else can find other stuff, but as it is, the subject certainly fails WP:CREATIVE or WP:ENT, and I have concerns over whether it meets WP:GNG (it is possible to meet WP:ANYBIO and fail GNG, and GNG's the one that matters). Ian.thomson (talk) 03:03, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added COI header to the other myriad of issues with the page, as it appears the subject himself is now editing the article. Mystic Technocrat (talk) 17:49, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The sources for this article are atrocious. Whoever thought the bulk of these references would be OK for wikipedia standards clearly needs to go back to freshmen writing and research & LIS (library information studies). This article's references are a horrible joke. What a mess. To fix this calamity will take a miracle. Geekyroyalaficionado (talk) 14:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infowars

[edit]

I noticed Infowars should be capitalized as InfoWars. Faolin42 (talk) 17:58, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Q-anon and all that, I don't think this should be in the lede even though it is covered in the article body. Not unless the lede also mentions Lionel's past affiliations. Jeh (talk) 22:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

QAnon Conspiracy Theorist?

[edit]

I fell upon this page and I can't see any valid sources for the claim that Lebron is a "far-right QAnon conspiracy theorist". In fact, the Washington Post source from Dave Weigel is problematic. Weigel is known to consistently produce poorly sourced and poorly updated news articles. He has on several occassions "stealth edited" his articles months later without putting editors notes. He falsely claims that people are associated with the far-right just because they were in the same room as them. His career has been riddled with controversy due to him being far left and openly writing propaganda pieces for democrats and the Washington Post. So yeah, he's a bad source and needs to be removed from this page. [1]. [2]

Drewwest press (talk) 11:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.politico.com/story/2010/07/media-stars-040044
  2. ^ https://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0610/More_leaked_Weigel_emails.html#site-content
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lionel_(radio_personality)&oldid=1195557090"