Misplaced Pages

Talk:Power Line

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs) at 10:12, 8 October 2024 (Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 10:12, 8 October 2024 by Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs) (Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Power Line article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBlogging (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging
WikiProject iconConservatism Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconUnited States Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconWebsites: Computing Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.


Analysis of sourcing in the article as of April 16, 2021

When I added the notability template on April 6, I did so with the following edit summary, "Is this blog really notable? Article only cites two sources, and I'm having difficulty finding material ABOUT it." Since then XavierItzm has done a lot of work on the article, and added a lot of sources. Today XavierItzm removed the notability tag with the following edit summary, "Putting this one to rest. When your sources include The New York Times, The Boston Globe, CNN, NPR, Time, Politico and The Hill, among others, the goose is cooked." Now, before I added the notability tag I had seen articles in those sources quoting Powerline (or Power Line - sources spell it both ways), but not articles about Powerline, so I was curious what had been found.

  1. JEFF JACOBY (13 January 2010). "Harry Reid's racial imbroglio". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 16 January 2010. Retrieved 16 April 2021. At PowerLine, a widely-read conservative blog, John Hinderaker - Not in depth coverage of Powerline. It quotes Powerline, and justifies quoting Powerline by describing it as "a widely-read conservative blog"; but it doesn't constitute significant coverage.
  2. TOBIN HARSHAW (6 November 2009). "Are Democrats, Too, Facing a Civil War?". The New York Times. Retrieved 16 April 2021. And not from conservative bloggers, either. John Hinderaker of Powerline thinks a rebellion on the fringe may hurt centrist Democrats - Again, is not significant coverage of Powerline. Mentions it in passing while quoting it.
  3. Jason Cohen (14 December 2011). "Holder Holds the Voting Line at LBJ Library". Texas Monthly. Retrieved 16 April 2021. John Hinderaker at the conservative blog Powerline also enjoyed the symbolism of Holder speaking at the LBJ Library, albeit for very different reasons: "Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act in 1965—Holder's intended reference—but he is also associated with voter fraud." - Same situation as the first two.
  4. CHRISTOPHER BEAM (17 April 2007). "The Mourning After". Slate (magazine). Retrieved 16 April 2021. Conservative John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog argues that normally there's "nothing wrong" - Same as the first three.
  5. JOHN BOWDEN (11 March 2021). "CNN's Tapper battles GOP senator over mean tweets". The Hill. Retrieved 16 April 2021. Cornyn tweeted, quoting the right-leaning Powerline blog - Again, no significant coverage of Powerline.
  6. ARI SHAPIRO (4 October 2005). "Bloggers Fire Away on Miers Nomination". National Public Radio. Retrieved 16 April 2021. ARI SHAPIRO reporting: John Hinderacker spent yesterday criticizing President Bush on the political Web site powerlineblog.com - This one comes closer. But it's still essentially a quote and a brief (one sentence) description of the website rather than significant coverage.
  7. Kher, Unmesh (December 19, 2004). "Blogs Have Their Day". Time. Archived from the original on 2012-03-04. {{cite magazine}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 2012-05-04 suggested (help) - This seems like an excellent source for this article. It is in-depth significant coverage in a reliable source. So here's one.
  8. https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/02/016571.php - Not independent, so doesn't contribute to notability, but fine for establishing some general facts.
  9. http://web.archive.org/web/20070304000738/http://newsbloggers.aol.com/category/power-line/ - See above; doesn't contribute to notability as not independent, but fine for establishing the fact that AOL included them.
  10. https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0607/4483_Page2.html - We're back to failing significant coverage. It's mentioned on a list of blogs they should talk to.
  11. Budoff Brown, Carrie (June 13, 2007). "GOP issues rules to avoid Macaca moments". Politico. - not significant coverage
  12. "How Not To Discredit A Poll". CBS News. 23 June 2009. Retrieved 16 April 2021. John Hinderaker at Power Line, a prominent conservative blog, pushed back - again, this is not significant coverage, even though they are quoted at length in the article, the article is not about them.
  13. "Rathergate". Frontline (American TV program). Public Broadcasting Service. 2007. Retrieved 16 April 2021. Of course your most famous bump-up in recognition came during the 2004 election. Can you just lay out the story for us? I called that post "The 61st Minute," - This one is interesting. It is an interview with the bloggers about the impact the blog had on a specific story. General consensus on Misplaced Pages (which I disagree with, btw, but that's neither here nor there) is that interviews with article subjects do not contribute to notability as they are not independent.
  14. Scott Johnson, Scott (September 9, 2004). "The sixty-first minute". Power Line. - Again, not independant.
  15. "Courthouse Shooting in Seattle; Bolton Nomination Before the Senate ... Again; The Hunt of Osama bin Laden Continues; Saddam and the Downing Street Memo in the Blogs". CNN. 20 June 2005. Retrieved 16 April 2021. over now to Powerlineblog.com. This is the three conservative lawyers who blog over here and maintain this site. They were the ones who were widely credited, along with their readers, with really blowing what is called in the blogosphere as Rathergate, those CBS documents last year about Bush's National Guard service. - more coverage of that specific incident.

Now, each of these sources serve a purpose in the article as it stands and I'm not advocating for removing any of them, but the only one that really meets the "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject," requirement of General notability is the article in Time. Or, as I said in my original edit summary, "I can't find articles about Powerline". ~ ONUnicornproblem solving 17:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Why are you blocking me? 2600:1700:7670:3850:DD30:166F:2E26:D060 (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Categories: