 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Isnt that fiction? 71.99.101.219 ( talk) 05:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- It seems so obvious that it is but NYT and Amazon classify it as non-fiction. I'd usually go with what are two seemingly reliable sources and call it non-fiction but it seems so obvious that it's fiction that I have no idea what to do. I decided no to classify it as either and let others decide. OlYeller Talktome 05:25, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Can we quote Steven Colbert's calling it 'hackneyed' and 'terrible writing'? DS ( talk) 20:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Surely a Peabody award winner is a reliable source so I see no reason not to. OlYeller Talktome 15:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45&aid=188069
but how to put in the article? 71.99.92.124 ( talk) 14:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
That's one and it even states in the same article that the NYT disagrees. Can we find some more so that it's not synthesis? OlYeller Talktome 14:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
I've created this section to help us sort out the differences. OlYeller Talktome 14:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- As it seems more and more apparent that the issue is controversial, I believe that this article shouldn't exclaim either way as I feel that it would be
original research and/or
synthesis. I instead created a section discussing the controversy. My first edits haven't really done it justice but it's a start.
OlYeller
Talktome
15:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Why not use sentence like:" Fiction book, which is controversaly marketed as nonfiction. + all three sources?
71.99.92.124 (
talk)
18:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'd agree to that if we can find more sources that show that it's widely believed to be fiction. It's sort of up the air right now and I think we can find many more sources if we try but I haven't been able to take the time to do it yet. I did leave a message over at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Books though and asked for some help with the whole article. Hopefully we can attract some others to help us out. OlYeller Talktome 18:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Why not use sentence like:" Fiction book, which is controversaly marketed as nonfiction. + all three sources?
71.99.92.124 (
talk)
18:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Collegiate Times - 'The Obama Diaries' proves critical of president's administration
- MSNBC - Laura Ingraham takes aim in ‘The Obama Diaries'
- AOL News - The Obama Diaries': 4 Most Outrageous Fake First Family Quotes
- NBC Today Show - Laura Ingraham takes aim in 'The Obama Diaries'
- Huffington Post - Colbert Slams Laura Ingraham For 'Obama Diaries
|
| This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Isnt that fiction? 71.99.101.219 ( talk) 05:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- It seems so obvious that it is but NYT and Amazon classify it as non-fiction. I'd usually go with what are two seemingly reliable sources and call it non-fiction but it seems so obvious that it's fiction that I have no idea what to do. I decided no to classify it as either and let others decide. OlYeller Talktome 05:25, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Can we quote Steven Colbert's calling it 'hackneyed' and 'terrible writing'? DS ( talk) 20:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Surely a Peabody award winner is a reliable source so I see no reason not to. OlYeller Talktome 15:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45&aid=188069
but how to put in the article? 71.99.92.124 ( talk) 14:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
That's one and it even states in the same article that the NYT disagrees. Can we find some more so that it's not synthesis? OlYeller Talktome 14:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
I've created this section to help us sort out the differences. OlYeller Talktome 14:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- As it seems more and more apparent that the issue is controversial, I believe that this article shouldn't exclaim either way as I feel that it would be
original research and/or
synthesis. I instead created a section discussing the controversy. My first edits haven't really done it justice but it's a start.
OlYeller
Talktome
15:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Why not use sentence like:" Fiction book, which is controversaly marketed as nonfiction. + all three sources?
71.99.92.124 (
talk)
18:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'd agree to that if we can find more sources that show that it's widely believed to be fiction. It's sort of up the air right now and I think we can find many more sources if we try but I haven't been able to take the time to do it yet. I did leave a message over at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Books though and asked for some help with the whole article. Hopefully we can attract some others to help us out. OlYeller Talktome 18:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Why not use sentence like:" Fiction book, which is controversaly marketed as nonfiction. + all three sources?
71.99.92.124 (
talk)
18:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Collegiate Times - 'The Obama Diaries' proves critical of president's administration
- MSNBC - Laura Ingraham takes aim in ‘The Obama Diaries'
- AOL News - The Obama Diaries': 4 Most Outrageous Fake First Family Quotes
- NBC Today Show - Laura Ingraham takes aim in 'The Obama Diaries'
- Huffington Post - Colbert Slams Laura Ingraham For 'Obama Diaries