Talk:Clay Travis

Latest comment: 7 months ago by AstroU in topic Untitled

Untitled

edit

I placed the "notability" tag on this page as I can't come up with any basis for this individual's inclusion on Wikipedia. I don't believe this individual's works are widely read, and writing columns on a sports Web site is not enough under the "notability" criteria and the bio is nothing more than a brief summation of his column history alongside material from his sportsline.com bio. Contrast this individual with other much more prominent Internet sports writers such as Bill Simmons. I'm certainly willing to listen to arguments to the contrary, however. 70.22.96.29 01:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

This page should have been nominated for deletion under the AfD process rather than PROD. The initial author also should have given an explanation for removing the deletion tag, although I would venture to guess that it is self-explanatory in that the author feels that the individual is noteworthy enough to merit a page. I would tend to disagree without more evidence of noteworthiness or popularity as a writer, the NPR interview is a good start but the Anderson Cooper transcript is a mention in passing and is essentially worthless. Ronnymexico 13:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Who the hell is this guy and why is his entry so long? 7 July 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.107.149.120 (talk) 15:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

good question. Pretty sure he fits in that "write your own entry" class of people who feel important if they have a Wiki entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.79.35.227 (talk) 15:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Maybe you guys get it now that he has his own national network radio show? 2600:1004:B14E:E425:4913:DED9:D810:44C1 (talk) 01:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I still fail to see the value of certain editors keeping quotes from the person on their page. It's not encyclopedic, it's insane. This is yet another article that allows a known RW media personality to claim he's this huge Democrat for validity, when the proof of what they support is public. It's getting ridiculous. I could say I'm the King of Hades, doesn't make it true....

THE ARTICLE LOOKS GREAT! The complaining comments are very old and shown to be obsolete. Can they be archived? The last two comments say it best! -- AstroU (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clay Travis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:57, 9 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2017

edit

In the Politics section, change "self described Southern White Conservative" to "self described Radical Moderate."

The reference in the article states that FS1 thought of him as a Southern White Conservative, not that he thinks of himself this way. He has used the "Radical Moderate" description to describe his politics repeatedly. He has never described himself as conservative.

Below are links to posts on his site where he refers to himself as a radical moderate:

https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/outkick-crushes-msespn-fox-news-msespn-fires-back/ https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/all-that-and-a-bag-of-mail-12/ 165.214.11.76 (talk) 17:18, 11 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. SparklingPessimist Scream at me! 01:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2017

edit

Sentence 2 of 3.2, "Controversies, CNN "Boobs" comment," quotes Brooke Baldwin saying:

"[W]hen I first heard 'boobs' from a grown man on national television (in 2017!!!) my initial thought bubble was: ‘Did I hear that correctly?'" with source 16 (http://thehill.com/homenews/media/350936-fox-sports-radio-host-on-cnn-i-believe-in-the-first-amendment-and-boobs) cited.

The only quote of Baldwin in source 16 is the tweet by her:

"That was... I just... it was one of those thought bubbles "did he actually say that on MY SHOW?!" Note to men -- that is never okay. #smh"

The quote in the article resembles but doesn't match the only relevant quote in the source. Pls replace former quote with latter. Thoreaux (talk) 03:48, 26 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

  Note: The quote exists but it is from an oped later. So i've cited it and added to the article Galobtter (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)Reply