Talk:Matt K. Lewis

Out of the country
No context is given for his "out of the country" remark. I can think of a few possible options. 1. He is so ignorant that he doesn't know that Hawaii is part of the USA. 2. He purposefully intended to insult the people of Hawaii by saying their state is not part of the United States. 3. He was concerned for some reason about Obama being out of the country when he was flying over the Pacific Ocean on his way back and forth from Hawaii. 4. He was trying to express the idea that Obama would be far away from Washington DC as well as most of the American people and made a mistake in his wording. I'm not sure which if any of these would make his remark worth mentioning in an encyclopedia article. Steve Dufour (talk) 03:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I ended up removing this. The controversy, such as it was, appears confined to a single blog post at the Huffington Post. As of today, if you Google Lewis' name and the phrase "out of the country," HuffPo is first and this article is second. I should also note, as a matter of disclosure, Lewis is a friendly acquaintance and I am working to improve this page with his knowledge. That said, I believe all of my edits here are well within Wikipedia's guidelines. But I welcome any feedback. WWB (talk) 00:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

PR Pieces from connections with Tucker Carlson and the Daily Caller
Critics of my attempted contributions; Where are you now when you see this kind of article appearing?--Wikipietime (talk) 12:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Article lead
A note here for in lieu of another revert: there are two content questions in the changes we disagree on. The first is whether to label him a blogger, and neither source in the lead calls him one; Wemple comes closer to characterizing him as a columnist, and the second source is from Lewis himself, which probably shouldn't be cited anyway. The second question is whether to list the Daily Caller first, and it seems odd to me to list it ahead of his current outlet; the Daily Caller belongs in the body, but not really in the lead at this point. Thoughts? WWB (talk) 01:20, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, WWB - and thank you for initiating a discussion on this matter. I don't completely disagree with you regarding listing his position at the Daily Beast before his stint at the Daily Caller - but keep in mind that the lead sentence should convey why the subject is notable, which doesn't always align seemlessly with what the subject is doing presently. For example, the lead of the George W. Bush article would not begin by describing him as an oil painter, and then later in the body of the article mention that he was also president of the United States. Lewis' notability stems from his work for the Daily Caller and his blogging, which span over a decade, while his position with the Daily Beast is just weeks old.  Regarding labeling him a blogger and columnist, you'll note that I retained your addition of "columnist" in my edits. He is still a host on bloggingheads.tv, and he is still producing regular podcasts and updates on his website (on which he still describes himself as a writer and blogger).  Again, "blogger" is mentioned in the lead because that is why he is notable, not because it is his primary activity today. (And you'll find the reference citations for "blogger" in the body of the article, per WP:LEADCITE.)


 * If you'd like to swap the position of "Daily Caller" and "Daily Beast" in the lead sentence, I won't contest it - as long as they are both in that sentence. I'm not persuaded that "blogger" should be deleted from the lead sentence. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 15:28, 28 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey, I didn't see you'd replied until just now. Thanks for the considered reply. I'll relent on "blogger"; I see now his own site does use the term, and since Wikipedia deems any actor who has ever executive produced a feature film to be an "actor and producer" I won't put up a fight. As for your assertion that his notability relates to the Daily Caller, I'm dubious. Lewis had a Wikipedia entry prior to his stint there, and I would imagine his CNN and HBO appearances have reached far more people. I won't update the entry again yet, but again I see no reason to list Daily Caller in the introduction as opposed to his previous outlets, which were fairly high-profile as well. WWB (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2017 (UTC)


 * ...I see no reason to list Daily Caller... --WWB
 * Hi, WWB. The information in two cited sources in the lead can be summarized thusly: "I used to be with Daily Caller, now I'm with Daily Beast". (In fact, both sources even have Daily Caller in their titles.)  That is why our lead reads the way it does.  Oh, and as for what he's done for The Week, our article uses the same wording that the only source mentioning that outlet does. I hope that clears thing up for you.  Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

"and is based in Alexandria, Virginia"
I don't know where he is "based", but he lives in West Virginia now 2603:8001:9500:9E98:0:0:0:9A7 (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)