![]() | Checkers speech is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 4, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can we please get a cite of the Checkers speech being "ridiculed" if that final sentence is going to stay in the article? I don't see how personal information can be considered irrelevant, given that the accusation involved shenanigans with Nixon's personal finances. I strongly disagree with the notion that Nixon would use his personal financial state as a trivial matter; he abhorred having to invade his and Pat's privacy, Pat didn't like it either, and throughout his memoirs and books, Nixon refers to this as a tremendous strain on his family at the time. - Anon.
Sadly, both the obituary links cited are no longer available from their respective newspapers. Robert K S 22:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
More interestingly, how about some REAL commentary on the speech? NO mention of the tactic of pulling away fromt the main issues at hand and focusing on family values, and essentially distracting attentions from the idea of corruption. This is a public and VERY successful example of a concept (I forget the name) utilized by spin doctors. This article is poorly written and the analysis is just pedestrian.
That parenthetical remark about the speech being a subtle attack on the Democratic Party -- that attack was so subtle I still don't see it. (This is because the assertion was a subtle way for the writer, a Nixon lover, to make a derogatory joke "fair and balanced", by linking it to a decade-old FDR speech, thereby deflecting the dog-Nixon comparison made by his own party).
Wow, that's easy. I can put parentheses around any outrageous, unfounded statement that I want, and then I won't have to provide context or citations or anything! So, what does Checkers have to do with the Fala speech? Both speeches involve dogs. That's it? Are these incidents in any way similar, that the joke could be construed in this manner? That parenthetical statement is badly written and needs to provide more information, or just be removed.
Hi, I've started to revamp and expand this project with the goal of bringing it to FA level in the next few months. Please feel free to help out. Images are an especial need here.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 03:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
The article lists a quotation naming attacks against Nixon as a "viscous smear". Shouldn't this be "vicious"? 151.204.151.188 ( talk) 22:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't feel I should add to the GAN page once the article has been promoted, so I will note some unresolved issues and what I've done about them here:
I think that was it on specific concerns.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 12:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't that have been resolved? 198.203.177.177 ( talk) 15:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I note that an IP has three times added a statement, without citations, that amounts a slam at Nixon for the 1960 debates. The only thing I am aware of in common between the Checkers speech and the debates is that both involved Nixon and television. In any event, the statement is POV and lacks a source. I propose to remove it. I'm not as concerned about the "path" thing, that's just a convenient shorthand way of referring to Nixon becoming president. Obviously he had setbacks along the way. The question of 1956 has always been a bit hazy to me, and I am anxiously looking forward to the second volume of Gellman's bio of Nixon, which will deal with his VPship. In the meantime, we try to cover Nixon as neutrally as possible.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 12:54, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
This article sports pictures of buildings and other locations that became marginally significant months later, and of people somewhat connected to the topic, and even includes a mention of where "Checkers" is buried, fer cryin' out loud, but no picture of Checkers. Am I missing something?-- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 19:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I've added this image, captioned "The Nixons' black-and-white cocker spaniel Checkers (1952-64)." Note that the image is licensed by Time-Life for non-commercial use; on Wikipedia, it is licensed under fair use to identify Checkers, due to the fact that whereas the focus of the article is the speech, a major thrust involves the bio of the pet.-- Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 00:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I noticed that there's a few Harvard errors present in the article. You can see them easily if you install Ucucha's script, which makes them show up in bold red font.
To install the script, add:
importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js');
to Special:MyPage/common.js. AmericanLemming ( talk) 03:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I have translated this article to Chinese Wikipedia here and promoted to FA status, and I want to thank User:Wehwalt for his effort to write this amazing article. -- Jarodalien ( talk) 08:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Checkers speech. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
I changed the "Bibliography" section to a subsection. This is a relatively minor adjustment but as a section this title is usually placed first in the appendixes related to biographies or named "Works or publications", "Discography", or "Filmography" per MOS:BIB. Using a separate source related "Bibliography" section is confusing and out of place. We commonly practice placing relate subjects in a subsection so it seems appropriate to follow this with source links (generally listed), and links providing inline text-source integrity, that combined form the citations. Otr500 ( talk) 17:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Should it be noted that he told two lies about his wife? "Pat's ... name was Patricia Ryan and she was born on St. Patrick's day." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:205:3:DEE2:3549:216C:AE55:8466 ( talk) 20:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | Checkers speech is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 4, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can we please get a cite of the Checkers speech being "ridiculed" if that final sentence is going to stay in the article? I don't see how personal information can be considered irrelevant, given that the accusation involved shenanigans with Nixon's personal finances. I strongly disagree with the notion that Nixon would use his personal financial state as a trivial matter; he abhorred having to invade his and Pat's privacy, Pat didn't like it either, and throughout his memoirs and books, Nixon refers to this as a tremendous strain on his family at the time. - Anon.
Sadly, both the obituary links cited are no longer available from their respective newspapers. Robert K S 22:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
More interestingly, how about some REAL commentary on the speech? NO mention of the tactic of pulling away fromt the main issues at hand and focusing on family values, and essentially distracting attentions from the idea of corruption. This is a public and VERY successful example of a concept (I forget the name) utilized by spin doctors. This article is poorly written and the analysis is just pedestrian.
That parenthetical remark about the speech being a subtle attack on the Democratic Party -- that attack was so subtle I still don't see it. (This is because the assertion was a subtle way for the writer, a Nixon lover, to make a derogatory joke "fair and balanced", by linking it to a decade-old FDR speech, thereby deflecting the dog-Nixon comparison made by his own party).
Wow, that's easy. I can put parentheses around any outrageous, unfounded statement that I want, and then I won't have to provide context or citations or anything! So, what does Checkers have to do with the Fala speech? Both speeches involve dogs. That's it? Are these incidents in any way similar, that the joke could be construed in this manner? That parenthetical statement is badly written and needs to provide more information, or just be removed.
Hi, I've started to revamp and expand this project with the goal of bringing it to FA level in the next few months. Please feel free to help out. Images are an especial need here.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 03:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
The article lists a quotation naming attacks against Nixon as a "viscous smear". Shouldn't this be "vicious"? 151.204.151.188 ( talk) 22:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't feel I should add to the GAN page once the article has been promoted, so I will note some unresolved issues and what I've done about them here:
I think that was it on specific concerns.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 12:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't that have been resolved? 198.203.177.177 ( talk) 15:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I note that an IP has three times added a statement, without citations, that amounts a slam at Nixon for the 1960 debates. The only thing I am aware of in common between the Checkers speech and the debates is that both involved Nixon and television. In any event, the statement is POV and lacks a source. I propose to remove it. I'm not as concerned about the "path" thing, that's just a convenient shorthand way of referring to Nixon becoming president. Obviously he had setbacks along the way. The question of 1956 has always been a bit hazy to me, and I am anxiously looking forward to the second volume of Gellman's bio of Nixon, which will deal with his VPship. In the meantime, we try to cover Nixon as neutrally as possible.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 12:54, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
This article sports pictures of buildings and other locations that became marginally significant months later, and of people somewhat connected to the topic, and even includes a mention of where "Checkers" is buried, fer cryin' out loud, but no picture of Checkers. Am I missing something?-- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 19:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I've added this image, captioned "The Nixons' black-and-white cocker spaniel Checkers (1952-64)." Note that the image is licensed by Time-Life for non-commercial use; on Wikipedia, it is licensed under fair use to identify Checkers, due to the fact that whereas the focus of the article is the speech, a major thrust involves the bio of the pet.-- Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 00:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I noticed that there's a few Harvard errors present in the article. You can see them easily if you install Ucucha's script, which makes them show up in bold red font.
To install the script, add:
importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js');
to Special:MyPage/common.js. AmericanLemming ( talk) 03:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I have translated this article to Chinese Wikipedia here and promoted to FA status, and I want to thank User:Wehwalt for his effort to write this amazing article. -- Jarodalien ( talk) 08:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Checkers speech. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
I changed the "Bibliography" section to a subsection. This is a relatively minor adjustment but as a section this title is usually placed first in the appendixes related to biographies or named "Works or publications", "Discography", or "Filmography" per MOS:BIB. Using a separate source related "Bibliography" section is confusing and out of place. We commonly practice placing relate subjects in a subsection so it seems appropriate to follow this with source links (generally listed), and links providing inline text-source integrity, that combined form the citations. Otr500 ( talk) 17:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Should it be noted that he told two lies about his wife? "Pat's ... name was Patricia Ryan and she was born on St. Patrick's day." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:205:3:DEE2:3549:216C:AE55:8466 ( talk) 20:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)