Talk:Rush Limbaugh

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rush Limbaugh 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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12: 30 days

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rush Limbaugh 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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12: 30 days

Rush Limbaugh was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 5, 2004	Peer review	Reviewed
September 5, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
January 22, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Politics and Government C‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Media C‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Missouri C‑class

	Missouri portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Radio C‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Journalism C‑class

	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 articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative Views C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

ESPN

Limbaugh's commentary accused all Philadelphia sport media of conspiring to only say/print positive things about McNabb. This is not racist, but is untrue, and certainly contributed to his dismissal. I think the ESPN section should be expanded to include this. Glkanter (talk) 15:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's what he said, and I think that the whole thing was just a media stunt to begin with so really it wasn't supposed to end "well." The current version appears all right to me. Soxwon (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've found various slightly different wordings of what he said, and I indeed overstated the 'media' portion. It was, as the article states, racist. Glkanter (talk) 19:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really. Please provide a source that says so.Jarhed (talk) 01:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now I know why He talks the way he talks......he is uneducated!! Coming from a family of so many highly educated people he has a complex!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.199.247 (talk) 12:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]

How could what Rush said be racist? He said that the press wanted a black quarterback to succeed. That's not racist. I wanted a black quarterback to succeed too. I'm black. Does that mean I'm racist toward my own race? In my opinion, "that's racist" is becoming a worn out mantra in the U.S. and I'm tired of hearing it.

WtF?

why do you guys continue to revert my new lead?[1] John Asfukzenski (talk) 13:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What we are trying to do is cover what is important to the article. The guidelines for the lead sections have the size listed as about 15,000 to 30,000 characters. While your edit brings it more towards that range, it also includes some not so WP:NPOV additions and a lot of uncited material. If those things were addressed (and if you want assistance I'd be happy to help), then I would have no problem. Soxwon (talk) 15:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Give an explanation how my lead was not NPOV? John Asfukzenski (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for one, it has an overkill on conservative/right-wing. Does it really need to be mentioned 5 times? Soxwon (talk) 20:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that your change is no improvement. Also, we already had the discussion about "right wing".Jarhed (talk) 03:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rush Limbaugh is about as influential to the conservative cause than anyone in the United States. I do not see what the issue is. John Asfukzenski (talk) 15:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that it brings the lead beyond reasonable length, it's neutrality is questioned, and that it removes some content. Imagine if the lead on Barack Obama mentioned liberal or left-wing five times in the lead. -- Oldlaptop321 (talk·contribs) 02:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also imagine what would happen if someone rewrote the Obama lede without discussing it first. This is a controversial article, and there is a warning at the top of this page to please discuss substantial changes before making them. I don't think that is unreasonable.Jarhed (talk) 04:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obama is a liberal left-wing and limbaugh is a conservative right wingthey are not offensive terminology I do not see where this argument is comming from I know I am far after the discussion but the fact people are taking offence to non offensive terminology is really bizzarre--69.146.148.56 (talk) 15:30, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hearing loss

There have been numerous examples of deafness being caused by oxycontin. Limbaugh's deafness, while officially attributed to AIED, is largely believed to have been caused by years worth of drug addiction. This appears no where within the article, even though there are a number of sources that could provide the both the links between deafness and oxycontin abuse and the theory that this is what caused Limbaugh's deafness. I believe it should be included. Thoughts? Erikeltic (talk) 18:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide some of these sources? The Incident (talk) 20:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other than casting doubt on the integrity of Limbaugh's doctors and causing potential embarrassment to Limbaugh, what are encyclopedic benefits of this proposed addition? The physicians that examined and treated Limbaugh have provided the official diagnosis of Autoimmune inner ear disease and even confirmed this diagnosis after speculation began as to other causes.[2] While media contains reports of other physicians speculating as to the cause of Limbaugh's deafness, such reports are just that, speculation.

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons requires "Biographies of living people should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone." Including speculative optional causes from "experts" who have never had the opportunity to perform a professional examination of the subject when a perfectly valid explanation has been provided by knowledgeable experts positioned to have full knowledge of the true causes is neither conservative nor responsible.--Allen3 ^talk 20:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What they said. Your theory lacks a source to prove it.Jarhed (talk) 07:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diet

Is it just me, are has Limbaugh REALLY lost weight lately? Wow. Seeing him in his recent interview with Shaun Hannity, he has noticeably lost weight, enough to certainly affect his visual appearance. I believe its claimed that he lost 27 pounds in his first 27 days, that he's lost up to 63 pounds total so far, and claims he will continue his plan for another 75 pounds before he stops.

His amazing weight loss has been coming up a bit on his show as of late, and though he doesn't want to talk about it much, he did address it a bit to callers on his show. He refuses to post the diet, but has provided clues that its some sort of low carb one (mostly from his April 20th show I believe). If someone can help get the facts straight, then I think a diet section underneath the personal life category of his page should defiantly be considered. Like him or hate him, when a public figure manages to accomplished such weight loss, its certainly to be commended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheHolyDarkness (talk • contribs)

Politely put, whether something should be commended or not doesn't make it notable. And didn't Rush lose weight a few years ago also? Dayewalker (talk) 19:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I heard him say this week he was down to 220. Regardless, what is the standard for determining if this should be mentioned? The Incident (talk) 19:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I marvel at people who obsess about how much Limbaugh weighs. No way is this notable.Jarhed (talk) 19:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New infobox image?

About Limbaugh's main picture, isn't it technically a mug shot? I mean, I know he was arrested but he's not known for being a criminal or is this article about him being a criminal. Anyone else have an image of him doing his one of his radio broadcast or something? I think that's more suitable than the current photo. -- R32GTR (talk) 13:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is the image that was previously used, File:Rush Limbaugh at CPAC (2009).jpg. The image is of lower resolution but has the advantage of not casting its subject under false light. --Allen3 ^talk 18:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care which image is used here, but the mug shot photo doesn't look like a typical mug shot, and I wouldn't have thought that it was a mug shot if I didn't look at the description. It is in focus, well lit and the subject is well dressed, smiling and wearing nice clothes. --rogerd (talk) 03:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Father's military record

Need a source for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.218.107 (talk) 17:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Birther

On his website I have seen several bits where he brings up Obama's birth certificate. If he is indeed a "Birther" (there is an entry on this site) Should this be mentioned? If a well known liberal pundit happened to believe 9/11 was perpetrated by the Bush Administration and used his program to spread this it would probably be mentioned. No? I don't think it violates NPOV since it is an extreme view and is notable in the context of the business Rush is in.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.91.247 (talk) 01:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Linked that for you. That's the first I've heard of it (the term, not the nutty conspiracy theory). Yes, if the de facto leader of the Republican Party is a "Birther," then it should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.218.107 (talk) 11:21, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He is not a birther. On his show, he says repeatedly that he just wants Obama to release his birth certificate. Most major Conservative Leaders (Ie: Not the nutjobs on the news) simply want Obama to release the birth certificate so the debate can be dropped. (I listen to Rush daily)

Mugshot

Is it appropriate to include Rush's mugshot in this article? The Incident (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We would have to have a copy of the mugshot to add to the article. Until we have that picture in wikicommons, with a proper fair use rational, its a moot point. TharsHammar^Bits and^Pieces 22:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this it? [[3]]The Incident (talk) 02:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes File:Rush Limbaugh.jpg is the mugshot, which is probably one of the nicest mugshots I have ever seen. His hair is in place, he is well dressed and with a slight smile, and there is no apparent police signage visible. I think that if you didn't know that it was a mugshot, you would think that it is a decent portrait. --rogerd (talk) 02:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Shopping v.s. Fraud

The artilce refers to "Dr. Shopping" and the photograph in that section refers to "fruad". What is the right term for the article? While there is a wikipedia article for Dr. Shopping, it seems that the proper term is fraud. It seems more accurate in the article to say that the warrant for his arrest was for fraud. I realize that might be controversial, but it seems that it would be more accurate in this case. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 00:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The proper term would probably be Substance abuse if you are talking about the oxy indicent. For the viagra it would be something like Sex Tourism. TharsHammar^Bits and^Pieces 01:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

current weight lose

Rush has lost 80 lbs in 5 months. He is currently 210 lbs. his is noteably because he was always known as being overweight withc he is no longer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.125.89 (talk) 01:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any WP:RS's for that which report it as a fact and significant?--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 03:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rush has made this claim and it can be seen by looking at photos of him during that time period. It has been reported by many including ABC. This is noteworthy because his critics have razzed his about his weight, most noteably Al Frankin with the title of his book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.125.89 (talk) 01:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]