Talk:Karl Oliver

Inclusion of singular op-ed opinion in article
There appears to be some disagreement on whether the following sentence should be included in its current state: "An editorial in the Mississippi Clarion-Ledger stated that the apology did not go far enough, and called for Oliver to resign for his statements."

I am of the opinion that the point of view of one newspaper, presented alone gives undue weight to that viewpoint. Further, the point of view expressed is not also expressed by other reliable sources. I struggle to see the relevance of an op-ed calling for a politician to resign. Lest it turn into an edit war, can we get a consensus on the inclusion of this line?

Cjhard (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't really think it belongs in the article, but didn't feel strongly enough to remove it when I edited to clarify that it was an editorial. Funcrunch (talk) 16:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The Clarion-Ledger is, functionally, the paper of record for the state of Mississippi. That is different from it being just "one newspaper" as if it were merely the town paper of Bumshart, Nebrahoma (population 24 + cows) or something similar. Morty C-137 (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Although I think it's quite irrelevant to the point, on what basis are you saying that it's 'functionally the paper of record'? If you find some reliable sources for such a reputation I'd highly recommend adding it to the newspaper's article. Cjhard (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2017 (UTC)