Talk:Bill Whittle

POV
I'm concerned that this page is not written from a neutral point of view. There's just something about the way it's written. Also, most edits have been made by similar IP addresses, so I'm thinking the page was written by a fan. Thoughts? Paris1127 (talk) 20:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You are spot on. This article is clearly a puff piece written either by a fan or possible the person himself. The article needs serious attention and contrary points of view. To start with the article should probably include something about Whittle's prior political (liberal) perspective along with his anti-conservative view points.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.127.172 (talk) 05:11, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Whittle has been a guest on WN sympathizer Stephan Molyneux's vlog a few times and they chatted about "human biodoveristy" and racial differences in IQ - a hobbyhorse of Whittle's in recent years, he has carried a similar perspective on the supposed hierarchy of ethnicity and human intelligence (asian -> white -> hispanic -> black) over to his work at NRA TV, surprised this isn't mentioned in the bio. Agree with it or not it's an important perspective on the alt right and a significant break from old-school "colorblind" conservatism. Dragula (talk) 19:32, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Puff piece of self promotion allowed to stand. Shame. Wikipietime (talk) 00:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

BLP issue
Two of the recent editors to this article, and, disagree as to whether the article subject should be referred to as "conservative" or "neoconservative":. (Given that both are editing anonymously, I'll refer to each by their first octet.)

72 brought this to my attention on my talk page, concerned that the term "neoconservative" is neither supported by a source nor the rest of the article, and that this is a violation of our policy on biographies of living persons. Well, he/she is right. 69, if you don't have a source that says he is a neoconservative (or that people have called him such), you can't just add it in based on your belief that he meets the definition. That's original research and is explicitly forbidden not only by the "no original research" policy but also by the BLP policy.

Further, 69, when you were reverted, especially when the edit summary asks for a source, it is then your responsibility to provide a source before re-adding the material. See WP:PROVEIT for details, but to sum it up, if someone challenges material you've inserted and asks you to provide a source supporting it, you must find such a source and cite it when you re-add the material, or you are in violation of a core Wikipedia policy (and may be blocked from editing if you continue to add challenged, unreferenced material).

I am semi-protecting the article for 3 days (and, pursuant to WP:BLP, removing the unsourced challenged phrase in question from the article) to see if this can start a discussion between these two anonymous editors. If you discuss it here and can't reach a resolution, you can ask for a third opinion or open a thread at the dispute resolution noticeboard. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 23:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Short and sweet
never heard of this person until now. to the point: if there is no criticism extant of this obviously opinionated person, then he is not notable. and if he is notable, their must be criticism of him somewhere, presumably from the "liberal" media. How can there be no commentary on him outside the conservative media? im looking for it.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:17, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

heres one:

"Now if you've never read Bill Whittle (count yourself blessed), imagine SCTV's sneery, "acerbic" critic Bill Needle (Dave Thomas) with a red hot poker up his ass setting everybody straight about the collapse of Western Civilization and pointing his finger at you, yes you, Miss Janeane Garofalo, with your stuck-up showbiz attitude! Which you can take right back to the dog pound, missy, along with your sardonic manner!" James Wolcott

and...nothing else. other than this, i cant find a single comment from a notable person on mr whittle. nothing, outside his fellow conservatives. what does that say? notice im not editing the article, as i cant prove a negative, but it seems that this article gives the impression that he is of some note in the real world. he is not. he is ONLY known in the right wing world. the rest of the world doesnt even know he exists, except for a few lone voices like the above. So, anyone want to try to edit this article based on this fact? im not even going to try to edit it, as i can only imagine the army of promoters waiting to swoop down on any edits to this article that dont puff him up more. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:43, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Stewardess? Not in source
§ Early life begins
 * Whittle was born in New York City to a British stewardess and William Joseph Whittle, a hotel manager.

But the reference says of his mother that she "remains, to this day, a proud British Subject", nothing about her profession. --Thnidu (talk) 07:45, 25 February 2019 (UTC)