![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I sought but did not find an article on the white house press corps. Mathiastck 18:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I am quite surprised that this article is so useless. I hope someone comes up with something, but I don't know anything about them. -- Sven Erixon 06:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The link provided should be removed. It is a blog that states "This site is not associated with the White House Correspondents' Association or its members in any way. We are an independent media watchdog source providing information and commentary on the relationship between the press and the White House. We welcome your input and discussion." It might be a fine blog which covers the White House but is unrelated to the white house press corps, the subject of this article. --AD 12:56 Jan 28 2008 (CST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.199.13 ( talk)
Done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.199.84 ( talk) 18:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Any objection to moving this page from "White House Press Corps" to "White House press corps"? - Walkiped ( T | C) 03:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
It was a simple edit but was reverted for lack of references. The editor identified himself on my talk page as being one of the CNN reporters mentioned in the edit. Probably innocent enough of an edit (assuming there are references available) but I offered to assit with the edit anyway since the editor in question mentioned being new to it all. Just an FYI.-- RadioFan ( talk) 16:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
This article is lacks information about who determines the composition of the press corps, or then number of members in it. Who makes this decision, and how has the size and composition of the press corps changed over time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.92.9.130 ( talk) 23:20, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Per suggestion GabeIglesia expanded the opening paragraph to reflect the fact that the term "White House press corps" is generally understood to include, not just correspondents and reporters, but all media assigned to or covering the White House, such as producers and photographers.
In line with that, subtitle "Correspondents" should be broadened to reflect same -- perhaps "Members" ?
Also suggest that revised opening paragraph be further revised to say "group of journalists, correspondents, and other [delete or] members of the media . . ."
Azzurroribbon ( talk) 01:27, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Azzurroribbon, where are you getting your information from? I ask because I'm working on Jack Posobiec. Posobiec left Rebel Media last month, so does that mean his access to White House press briefings has been revoked? -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 18:11, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Moates is not a journalist, but rather a blogger for his own "news" site which just recycles current events with bombastic and regularly false headlines.
He does not have a hard pass, but rather just gets daily passes on occasion.
He keeps adding himself as a member of the press corps on the page despite not being an actual regular member. If we take his standard for being added to the page, then we could likely add hundreds of others who get in via daily passes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.103.201.192 ( talk) 19:59, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
I have restored the comments that were erroneously removed. Jamesharrison, stop removing others' comments. By taking personal offense and claiming these are WP:NPA, you are proving either one of two things: You do not understand the "personal attacks" policy. Personal attacks refers to "derogatory comments about other editors," and it explicitly says: "Comment on content, not on the contributor." Not once did the IP criticize you, only the subject within the article. The other thing this could prove: The only way you can claim that these are personal attacks on you is if you are actually Moates himself. Then you absolutely can take offense over the IP calling Moates/you a "clown," among other things. Yet you have repeatedly insisted already that you are not Moates himself; so, taking your word for it, I'll just assume that you don't understand the policy. Hence why I've reverted the comments again. Once more, do not remove them anymore. 104.52.53.152 ( talk) 16:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
It's a real shame that I can't edit this now because of the insistence of having Michael Moates in the article. To weigh in on that, I can't find any reliable source that he is a permanent member. He may just have ad day pass as per this article: [3]. Once we can edit again, I propose: 1. Only correspondents with "hard passes" be listed here 2. All correspondents who are currently listed should be removed unless a reliable source can be found showing that they have a "hard pass" I think if we adopt this standard we can avoid problems like this is the future.-- Rusf10 ( talk) 22:50, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Jamesharrison2014: With respect to your claim that the information I provided is false, please provide a citation. I agree with your statement that organizations, as opposed to individual journalists, hold the seats. With respect to your assertion reguarding a list of journalists with hard passes, there have been reports in WP:RS that individual journalists hold hard passes [6] .
I propose the following reformulation of inclusion criteria originally proposed by ValarianB:
Billhpike ( talk) 15:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi all, FWIW, this is my input for inclusion/exclusion in the list: (1) The WH, per the convention that it is the “people’s house,” has been (especially with the rise of “new media”) more lenient in handing out passes than, say, the Congress vis-à-vis Congressional passes. Therefore, I tend more toward inclusion than exclusion. (2) Permanent vs. Temporary Passes: Major news organizations of course have permanent passes as they have reporters assigned exclusively to the WH, plus a permanent pass is required by the WHCA for pool duty. Smaller, though legitimate, news organizations often do not have sufficient personnel which will allow them to assign one person to cover the WH exclusively. Such organizations also may not have the personnel to assign to pool duty – or in fact have an interest in having one of their reporters do pool duty. For those reasons they also may not think it worthwhile to go through the rigamarole of obtaining a permanent pass. So there are smaller, but legitimate, news organizations that do not hold permanent passes. To limit the list to holders of permanent passes would, IMO, exclude news organizations worthy of being included. (3) Term “WH Press Corps” I believe would include photographers/videographers assigned to the WH. However, I don’t believe photographers fit within the term “Correspondents” and therefore did not include them in the Correspondents list. I did include WH producers, however, because producers are more closely aligned with “Correspondents.” (4) Limitation to “WH Correspondent”: As noted above reporters of smaller, but legitimate, news organizations can wear many hats in covering DC, and thus may not be an “official” WH correspondent. A standard I attempt to apply is whether or not the WH is part of their “beat,” so to speak. That would of course eliminate the one-offs and curiosity seekers who obtain temporary passes. It’s a judgment on my part, to be sure, and I may not always have gotten it right. That is not to say attendance at briefings is a requirement, as many legitimate organizations cover the WH without an appearance at briefings – certainly not a necessity, especially for smaller organizations, since the briefings are on YouTube. (5) WP Notability: Don’t think this is a solution. Brian Karem is at most briefings; ChiaChieh Tang is certainly a legitimate correspondent. And I believe no one in the briefing room would vote to exclude Martha Joynt Kumar who, BTW, holds a hard pass. (6) Michael Moates – after some initial research I thought that Moates did not appear to qualify as a WH correspondent and so deleted him from the list with a notation to that effect. His name was promptly re-added to the list, where I left it (unalphabetized) until I had an opportunity to do further research. Events intervened and time passed, and before I had made a determination ”ValerianB” (believe that was who it was) deleted him. Azzurroribbon ( talk) 18:04, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Should the "correspondent" section include only correspondents of organizations with "hard passes"?-- Rusf10 ( talk) 15:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
I undid revision from 200.76.83.77 that deleted Michael Moates of the Nation One News Foundation (Chief White House Correspondent)<ref>{{cite web|title=Michael Moates _ LinkedIn|url=https://www.linkedin.com/in/mmoates/|website=LinkedIn|publisher=LinkedIn Corporation|accessdate=26 December 2017}}</ref>. This is contingent on a pending consensus from this talk page.
Also, I believe this article would gain benefit from being reviewed by WikiProject Journalism. ― Matthew J. Long -Talk- ☖ 20:29, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
I am moving the following material here until it can be properly supported with reliable, secondary citations, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS], WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream ( talk) 20:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Notable former correspondents
- Mike Allen – Politico
- Jim Angle – National Public Radio
- Jim Axelrod – CBS News
- Bret Baier – Fox News
- Richard Benedetto – USA Today
- Bob Berkowitz – CNN
- Wolf Blitzer – Jerusalem Post
- David Bloom – NBC News
- Caren Bohan – Reuters
- Rita Braver – CBS News
- David Broder – The Washington Post
- Tom Brokaw – NBC News
- Campbell Brown – NBC News
- Carl Cameron – Fox News
- Lou Cannon – The Washington Post, National Journal
- Ann Compton – ABC News Radio
- Helene Cooper – The New York Times
- Steve Daley – Chicago Tribune
- James Deakin – St. Louis Post-Dispatch
- Ann Devroy – Gannett Company, USA Today, The Washington Post
- John Dickerson – Time
- Sam Donaldson – ABC News
- John Donvan – ABC News
- Bill Downs – ABC News
- Mike Emanuel – Fox News
- Trude Feldman – The New York Times, The Washington Post
- Thomas Friedman – The New York Times
- David Gregory – NBC News
- Wendell Goler – Fox News
- Don Gonyea – NPR
- Savannah Guthrie – NBC News
- Laura Haim - Canal+
- Ed Henry – Fox News
- Jesse J. Holland – Associated Press
- Brit Hume – ABC News
- Gwen Ifill – The New York Times
- Chris Jansing – MSNBC
- Tom Jarriel – ABC News
- Herb Kaplow – NBC News
- John King – CNN
- Greg Kelly – Fox News
- Connie Lawn – USA Radio Network
- Carl Leubsdorf – The Baltimore Sun, The Dallas Morning News
- Jennifer Loven – Associated Press
- Suzanne Malveaux – CNN
- Christoph von Marschall – Der Tagesspiegel
- Julie Mason, newspaper and radio journalist
- Jane Mayer – The Wall Street Journal
- Sarah McClendon
- Myles Miller – The Daily
- Andrea Mitchell – NBC News
- Terry Moran – ABC News
- Sara Murray – CNN
- Sophia A. Nelson – Jet Magazine
- Norah O'Donnell – NBC News, MSNBC, CBS News
- Susan Page – USA Today
- John Palmer – NBC News
- Scott Pelley – CBS News
- Bill Plante – CBS News
- Sean Quinn – FiveThirtyEight.com
- Martha Raddatz – ABC News
- Dan Rather – CBS News
- Chip Reid – CBS News
- John Roberts – CBS News
- Arlette Saenz – ABC News, CNN
- Bill Sammon – The Washington Times, The Washington Examiner
- Bob Schieffer – CBS News
- Ari Shapiro – National Public Radio
- Claire Shipman – NBC News
- Hugh Sidey – Time
- Mark Smith – Associated Press
- Paul Sperry – Investor's Business Daily
- Lesley Stahl – CBS News
- Jake Tapper – ABC News
- Helen Thomas – Hearst Newspapers, United Press International
- Bob Thompson – Hearst Newspapers
- Chuck Todd – NBC News
- Alvin Toffler – York Gazette Daily
- Jim VandeHei – The Washington Post
- Mike Viqueira – Al Jazeera America
- Chris Wallace – NBC News
- Brian Williams – NBC News
- Juan Williams – The Washington Post
- Richard Wolffe – Newsweek
- Judy Woodruff – NBC News
- Byron York – National Review
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 00:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
I have taken down the RFC template because:
- It seems the main issue has been agreeably resolved:
- Someone who meets the criteria for notability of a person for activities carried out while they were working as a correspondent, but who is no longer a correspondent.
- It seems subsequent details are being agreeably resolved.
- The RFC is over two thousand words most of which are either OFFTOPIC/INAPPROPRIATE, or otherwise unhelpful for a new arrival trying to digest the RFC and respond.
I will not object if this edit is reverted, but if an RFC is still necessary then I strongly recommend a new clean and clear RFC be initiated. Alsee ( talk) 06:06, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
I would ask the community to define "notable former correspondents." It seems many individuals could have different definitions of this. DoctorTexan ( talk) 13:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
It is my hope that this list doesn't get out of control due to unlimited amounts of names.
People that could be added:
Carl Bernstien Bob Woodward Mark Knoller Mark Knoller Bill Plante Jim Axelrod Ed Henry Elaine Quijano Suzanne Malveaux Bret Baier Julie Mason
... found these in two minutes... see more here https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/administration/whbriefing/correspondents.html
My concern is this list could get extensive.
@ DoctorTexan: No prob. Btw, if you need an example of what the ref name tags looks like when it's used in an article, the very first one in this one uses it. So you can see what the footnote looks like at the bottom of the saved article, and what the markup looks like in edit mode. Nightscream ( talk) 14:16, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
@
Nightscream: - Done
DoctorTexan (
talk)
16:05, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Nightscream: @ Mathglot: @ Jurisdicta: - Since there is one list, I propose designating the years a correspondent was active in the White House... thoughts?? Also, if you wouldn't mind take a look at my merge suggestion below. Michael-Moates ( talk) 04:13, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I sought but did not find an article on the white house press corps. Mathiastck 18:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I am quite surprised that this article is so useless. I hope someone comes up with something, but I don't know anything about them. -- Sven Erixon 06:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The link provided should be removed. It is a blog that states "This site is not associated with the White House Correspondents' Association or its members in any way. We are an independent media watchdog source providing information and commentary on the relationship between the press and the White House. We welcome your input and discussion." It might be a fine blog which covers the White House but is unrelated to the white house press corps, the subject of this article. --AD 12:56 Jan 28 2008 (CST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.199.13 ( talk)
Done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.199.84 ( talk) 18:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Any objection to moving this page from "White House Press Corps" to "White House press corps"? - Walkiped ( T | C) 03:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
It was a simple edit but was reverted for lack of references. The editor identified himself on my talk page as being one of the CNN reporters mentioned in the edit. Probably innocent enough of an edit (assuming there are references available) but I offered to assit with the edit anyway since the editor in question mentioned being new to it all. Just an FYI.-- RadioFan ( talk) 16:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
This article is lacks information about who determines the composition of the press corps, or then number of members in it. Who makes this decision, and how has the size and composition of the press corps changed over time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.92.9.130 ( talk) 23:20, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Per suggestion GabeIglesia expanded the opening paragraph to reflect the fact that the term "White House press corps" is generally understood to include, not just correspondents and reporters, but all media assigned to or covering the White House, such as producers and photographers.
In line with that, subtitle "Correspondents" should be broadened to reflect same -- perhaps "Members" ?
Also suggest that revised opening paragraph be further revised to say "group of journalists, correspondents, and other [delete or] members of the media . . ."
Azzurroribbon ( talk) 01:27, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Azzurroribbon, where are you getting your information from? I ask because I'm working on Jack Posobiec. Posobiec left Rebel Media last month, so does that mean his access to White House press briefings has been revoked? -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 18:11, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Moates is not a journalist, but rather a blogger for his own "news" site which just recycles current events with bombastic and regularly false headlines.
He does not have a hard pass, but rather just gets daily passes on occasion.
He keeps adding himself as a member of the press corps on the page despite not being an actual regular member. If we take his standard for being added to the page, then we could likely add hundreds of others who get in via daily passes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.103.201.192 ( talk) 19:59, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
I have restored the comments that were erroneously removed. Jamesharrison, stop removing others' comments. By taking personal offense and claiming these are WP:NPA, you are proving either one of two things: You do not understand the "personal attacks" policy. Personal attacks refers to "derogatory comments about other editors," and it explicitly says: "Comment on content, not on the contributor." Not once did the IP criticize you, only the subject within the article. The other thing this could prove: The only way you can claim that these are personal attacks on you is if you are actually Moates himself. Then you absolutely can take offense over the IP calling Moates/you a "clown," among other things. Yet you have repeatedly insisted already that you are not Moates himself; so, taking your word for it, I'll just assume that you don't understand the policy. Hence why I've reverted the comments again. Once more, do not remove them anymore. 104.52.53.152 ( talk) 16:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
It's a real shame that I can't edit this now because of the insistence of having Michael Moates in the article. To weigh in on that, I can't find any reliable source that he is a permanent member. He may just have ad day pass as per this article: [3]. Once we can edit again, I propose: 1. Only correspondents with "hard passes" be listed here 2. All correspondents who are currently listed should be removed unless a reliable source can be found showing that they have a "hard pass" I think if we adopt this standard we can avoid problems like this is the future.-- Rusf10 ( talk) 22:50, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Jamesharrison2014: With respect to your claim that the information I provided is false, please provide a citation. I agree with your statement that organizations, as opposed to individual journalists, hold the seats. With respect to your assertion reguarding a list of journalists with hard passes, there have been reports in WP:RS that individual journalists hold hard passes [6] .
I propose the following reformulation of inclusion criteria originally proposed by ValarianB:
Billhpike ( talk) 15:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi all, FWIW, this is my input for inclusion/exclusion in the list: (1) The WH, per the convention that it is the “people’s house,” has been (especially with the rise of “new media”) more lenient in handing out passes than, say, the Congress vis-à-vis Congressional passes. Therefore, I tend more toward inclusion than exclusion. (2) Permanent vs. Temporary Passes: Major news organizations of course have permanent passes as they have reporters assigned exclusively to the WH, plus a permanent pass is required by the WHCA for pool duty. Smaller, though legitimate, news organizations often do not have sufficient personnel which will allow them to assign one person to cover the WH exclusively. Such organizations also may not have the personnel to assign to pool duty – or in fact have an interest in having one of their reporters do pool duty. For those reasons they also may not think it worthwhile to go through the rigamarole of obtaining a permanent pass. So there are smaller, but legitimate, news organizations that do not hold permanent passes. To limit the list to holders of permanent passes would, IMO, exclude news organizations worthy of being included. (3) Term “WH Press Corps” I believe would include photographers/videographers assigned to the WH. However, I don’t believe photographers fit within the term “Correspondents” and therefore did not include them in the Correspondents list. I did include WH producers, however, because producers are more closely aligned with “Correspondents.” (4) Limitation to “WH Correspondent”: As noted above reporters of smaller, but legitimate, news organizations can wear many hats in covering DC, and thus may not be an “official” WH correspondent. A standard I attempt to apply is whether or not the WH is part of their “beat,” so to speak. That would of course eliminate the one-offs and curiosity seekers who obtain temporary passes. It’s a judgment on my part, to be sure, and I may not always have gotten it right. That is not to say attendance at briefings is a requirement, as many legitimate organizations cover the WH without an appearance at briefings – certainly not a necessity, especially for smaller organizations, since the briefings are on YouTube. (5) WP Notability: Don’t think this is a solution. Brian Karem is at most briefings; ChiaChieh Tang is certainly a legitimate correspondent. And I believe no one in the briefing room would vote to exclude Martha Joynt Kumar who, BTW, holds a hard pass. (6) Michael Moates – after some initial research I thought that Moates did not appear to qualify as a WH correspondent and so deleted him from the list with a notation to that effect. His name was promptly re-added to the list, where I left it (unalphabetized) until I had an opportunity to do further research. Events intervened and time passed, and before I had made a determination ”ValerianB” (believe that was who it was) deleted him. Azzurroribbon ( talk) 18:04, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Should the "correspondent" section include only correspondents of organizations with "hard passes"?-- Rusf10 ( talk) 15:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
I undid revision from 200.76.83.77 that deleted Michael Moates of the Nation One News Foundation (Chief White House Correspondent)<ref>{{cite web|title=Michael Moates _ LinkedIn|url=https://www.linkedin.com/in/mmoates/|website=LinkedIn|publisher=LinkedIn Corporation|accessdate=26 December 2017}}</ref>. This is contingent on a pending consensus from this talk page.
Also, I believe this article would gain benefit from being reviewed by WikiProject Journalism. ― Matthew J. Long -Talk- ☖ 20:29, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
I am moving the following material here until it can be properly supported with reliable, secondary citations, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS], WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream ( talk) 20:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Notable former correspondents
- Mike Allen – Politico
- Jim Angle – National Public Radio
- Jim Axelrod – CBS News
- Bret Baier – Fox News
- Richard Benedetto – USA Today
- Bob Berkowitz – CNN
- Wolf Blitzer – Jerusalem Post
- David Bloom – NBC News
- Caren Bohan – Reuters
- Rita Braver – CBS News
- David Broder – The Washington Post
- Tom Brokaw – NBC News
- Campbell Brown – NBC News
- Carl Cameron – Fox News
- Lou Cannon – The Washington Post, National Journal
- Ann Compton – ABC News Radio
- Helene Cooper – The New York Times
- Steve Daley – Chicago Tribune
- James Deakin – St. Louis Post-Dispatch
- Ann Devroy – Gannett Company, USA Today, The Washington Post
- John Dickerson – Time
- Sam Donaldson – ABC News
- John Donvan – ABC News
- Bill Downs – ABC News
- Mike Emanuel – Fox News
- Trude Feldman – The New York Times, The Washington Post
- Thomas Friedman – The New York Times
- David Gregory – NBC News
- Wendell Goler – Fox News
- Don Gonyea – NPR
- Savannah Guthrie – NBC News
- Laura Haim - Canal+
- Ed Henry – Fox News
- Jesse J. Holland – Associated Press
- Brit Hume – ABC News
- Gwen Ifill – The New York Times
- Chris Jansing – MSNBC
- Tom Jarriel – ABC News
- Herb Kaplow – NBC News
- John King – CNN
- Greg Kelly – Fox News
- Connie Lawn – USA Radio Network
- Carl Leubsdorf – The Baltimore Sun, The Dallas Morning News
- Jennifer Loven – Associated Press
- Suzanne Malveaux – CNN
- Christoph von Marschall – Der Tagesspiegel
- Julie Mason, newspaper and radio journalist
- Jane Mayer – The Wall Street Journal
- Sarah McClendon
- Myles Miller – The Daily
- Andrea Mitchell – NBC News
- Terry Moran – ABC News
- Sara Murray – CNN
- Sophia A. Nelson – Jet Magazine
- Norah O'Donnell – NBC News, MSNBC, CBS News
- Susan Page – USA Today
- John Palmer – NBC News
- Scott Pelley – CBS News
- Bill Plante – CBS News
- Sean Quinn – FiveThirtyEight.com
- Martha Raddatz – ABC News
- Dan Rather – CBS News
- Chip Reid – CBS News
- John Roberts – CBS News
- Arlette Saenz – ABC News, CNN
- Bill Sammon – The Washington Times, The Washington Examiner
- Bob Schieffer – CBS News
- Ari Shapiro – National Public Radio
- Claire Shipman – NBC News
- Hugh Sidey – Time
- Mark Smith – Associated Press
- Paul Sperry – Investor's Business Daily
- Lesley Stahl – CBS News
- Jake Tapper – ABC News
- Helen Thomas – Hearst Newspapers, United Press International
- Bob Thompson – Hearst Newspapers
- Chuck Todd – NBC News
- Alvin Toffler – York Gazette Daily
- Jim VandeHei – The Washington Post
- Mike Viqueira – Al Jazeera America
- Chris Wallace – NBC News
- Brian Williams – NBC News
- Juan Williams – The Washington Post
- Richard Wolffe – Newsweek
- Judy Woodruff – NBC News
- Byron York – National Review
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 00:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
I have taken down the RFC template because:
- It seems the main issue has been agreeably resolved:
- Someone who meets the criteria for notability of a person for activities carried out while they were working as a correspondent, but who is no longer a correspondent.
- It seems subsequent details are being agreeably resolved.
- The RFC is over two thousand words most of which are either OFFTOPIC/INAPPROPRIATE, or otherwise unhelpful for a new arrival trying to digest the RFC and respond.
I will not object if this edit is reverted, but if an RFC is still necessary then I strongly recommend a new clean and clear RFC be initiated. Alsee ( talk) 06:06, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
I would ask the community to define "notable former correspondents." It seems many individuals could have different definitions of this. DoctorTexan ( talk) 13:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
It is my hope that this list doesn't get out of control due to unlimited amounts of names.
People that could be added:
Carl Bernstien Bob Woodward Mark Knoller Mark Knoller Bill Plante Jim Axelrod Ed Henry Elaine Quijano Suzanne Malveaux Bret Baier Julie Mason
... found these in two minutes... see more here https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/administration/whbriefing/correspondents.html
My concern is this list could get extensive.
@ DoctorTexan: No prob. Btw, if you need an example of what the ref name tags looks like when it's used in an article, the very first one in this one uses it. So you can see what the footnote looks like at the bottom of the saved article, and what the markup looks like in edit mode. Nightscream ( talk) 14:16, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
@
Nightscream: - Done
DoctorTexan (
talk)
16:05, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Nightscream: @ Mathglot: @ Jurisdicta: - Since there is one list, I propose designating the years a correspondent was active in the White House... thoughts?? Also, if you wouldn't mind take a look at my merge suggestion below. Michael-Moates ( talk) 04:13, 7 June 2021 (UTC)