Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Harry S. Truman's Farewell Address

Harry S. Truman&#39;s Farewell Address
I think this speech sums up Truman's presidency in a very compelling way. It has the bias of being autobiographical, but that's an obvious bias, so forgiveable. It greatly adds to the article by giving an example of Truman the person, as opposed to Truman the historical figure, and thus helps humanise the article.


 * Nominate and support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:40, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Support I don't think the government still has the morals and values he talks about, the government's effed up a lot after Truman stepped down, the Contras, Panama, Iran-Iraq disputes, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda etc. that's off-topic though... The speech is of a good quality considering the time, however, could some of the static be reduced or removed completely? —  Ancient Apparition •  Champagne?  • 6:04pm • 08:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This has already had heroic efforts to reduce static. Let me upload the unmodified original. Any further edits would probably make it sound really, really tinny and incomprehensible. Sometimes, you need to leave some static in. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean, boy that's nasty. —  Ancient Apparition •  Champagne?  • 8:10pm • 10:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 *  Comment . Oppose unless (i) an abridged version is produced for the main page, or (ii) there is consensus that this should not appear on the main page. Well done in the reduction of static. It could be better, but it's acceptable in that respect. However, I want to raise a quite different matter. I'm trying to imagine a 25-minute speech on the main page. If WP had been around in the 1940s, maybe. But not now. The scope and pacing of the speech are both on the slow, rambling side, more suitable to that decade that ours. Doesn't it need editing down to, say, 10 minutes? Five minutes would be better still, perhaps split up. I admit that I didn't listen to the whole file, but when I heard him go on about the renovations to the White House, I drifted off. Tony   (talk)  12:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. People can listen or not listen, but the transcript's there, and we can always give minute and second marks for the different topics. I also really don't think that's a valid reason to oppose, particularly given we have about 20 other speeches of the same length or longer, already promoted. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * What Adam said. If it's really the only issue against promoting, I would say promote it, then when we start placing things in time slots, we can have an FS group meeting on what we should pass over for the main page and whether those things should be desisted or not. Let's not go case by case, we should adopt a unified policy.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  02:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Support Interesting for many different historical reasons. There is a blip at about 9:35 or so - was the original tape / disk disturbed? Can the brief bit of duplicate dialogue be removed? Well done on the edit otherwise! Major Bloodnok (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. I just uploaded over. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:38, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Promoted Harry S. Truman's farewell address 1953.ogg as of right now the polls stand at 75% in favour. Thats about the 67% needed to pass. --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  21:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

