Talk:Chip Rogers

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

Handicapping[edit]

It's becoming clear that Collect is intent on reverting additions to this article no matter how well sourced they are. I have a thought: let's try to sort it out on the talk page. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Horsefeathers. I left in that he was employed by the firm - the bit that he made advertising claims opf having 80% success etc. is UNDUE and rather blatantly so. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a campaign pamphlet for or against anyone. BTW, making ppersonal attacks is not kosher here. Collect (talk) 14:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not campaigning, I'm drawing on what is available in published sources to help write a biography. You're edit-warring -- now at the limit of 3RR on this article. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:42, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Removal of clear and blatant WP:BLP violations and misuse of a source (the "80%" bit is editorial - the claim should include the fact that he was paid to read a script per the exact soame source) is not a violation of the edit war provisions - the insertion is, however, a violation of several policies. Note also that two if my "reverts" were clear and proper editorial changes. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The source says "his predictions, which he claimed had an 80 percent success rate" and also indicates quite clearly that Rogers appeared as "Will 'The Winner' Rogers". There's no BLP violation at all in having our article include this information. You are repeatedly reverting the properly-sourced additions of multiple editors. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:01, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(od) see [1] Your edits are seen as vindication by the socks. Cheers -- I guess he is right? Collect (talk) 00:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surely the right thing to do is not to pay any attention to what sockpuppets (or in this instance meatpuppets) think. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The right thing is to actually use the source in its entirety -- whch basically says he was hired to read ad copy for a handicapping service. The source does not say he was a handicapper, and the text of the ads is not something the source says was what he wrote - in fact it is clear that he was only reading ad copy. Which is a far cry from the BLP trash now infesting the page. Cheers. Collect (talk) 12:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm puzzled by the notion that this was an "infomercial". Neither reference uses that word. In addition: both references give us "Will the Winner". Rogers can say now that he wasn't a handicapper (and I've retained his denial), but one source tells us the announcer introduced him by saying "he's been a handicapper for decades". There's nothing in that section that isn't supported by the sources. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 06:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Um -- how can a person in his 20s have been a "handicapper for decades"? And he states that it was a scripted ad - we can use that term as being in the source. Cheers - but people in this world do read scripts written by others. Collect (talk) 11:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see even the word "ad" in the sources, let alone the term "scripted ad". I suggest admitting that you've got this one wrong: Rogers himself says (in the CT article) that this was a "national sports television show". Where on earth are you getting "ad" or "infomercial" from? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 11:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You insist on saying he "worked" for a "sports handicapping service" in Wikipedia's voice and removed what the guy actually said. Cheers - you are misusing what the source actually says - which is a strange way to edit a WP:BLP indeed. Note that my edit now did not use "ad" or "infomercial" which makes your wholesale reversion strange. Collect (talk) 12:42, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't remove what he said -- it's right there at the end of the paragraph. I'm growing increasingly concerned about your reading comprehension here (though at least now you appear to be acknowledging that you were wrong about "ad" and "infomercial"). Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically:
using the name Will "The Winner" Rogers, reportedly encouraging bettors to dial a "pay-per-call number" and claiming to have an 80% success rate for his predictions. Rogers said the media stories on the topic were "gutter politics"; he said the work was scripted, and that he was not a sports handicapper.
Is substantially different from the actual quote:
He has said,"“Some 14 years ago, my company had a contract to perform broadcasting duties on a nationally televised show which was aired on the USA Network. … I was reading from a predetermined script on a national sports television show that has been in production for 35 years.
Cheers. Collect (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's no presumption favoring use of extended quotations by article subjects, and indeed NPOV would counsel against it. My version preserves Rogers' denial without giving undue emphasis to it at the expense of readers' understanding of exactly what he was denying. Oh, by the way, were you mistaken about "infomercial"? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What would you call a programme which makes an extended appeal to viewers to call a phone number? Collect (talk) 20:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would call it what the sources call it, and indeed what Rogers himself calls it in those sources. Can I suggest that you consult WP:NOR? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Obama involved in a mind-control conspiracy to create a United Nations communist dictatorship"[edit]

"...Chip Rogers, a Republican, had convened a caucus that included a presentation on how President Barack Obama was involved in a mind-control conspiracy to create a United Nations communist dictatorship. The incident ended Rogers’ term as the Majority Leader."

"Georgia state Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers recently convened the Republican caucus at the Georgia State Capitol to discuss an alleged conspiracy between President Barack Obama, non-governmental organizations, state government entities and chambers of commerce to create a United Nations communist dictatorship."

"political vine"[edit]

Is not a reliable source per WP:RS for anything at all.[2]

Unsigned blog posts can not ever be used to support any contentious claims about any living persons. Period. It is a WordPress blog. Collect (talk) 20:37, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chip Rogers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chip Rogers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:08, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Rogers&oldid=1203484140"