Jump to content

Talk:John Oliver

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleJohn Oliver 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 5, 2023Good article nomineeListed
August 29, 2023Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 18, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that John Oliver has been credited with influencing United States law and culture, a phenomenon dubbed the "John Oliver effect"?
Current status: Featured article

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 16:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Oliver in 2016
Oliver in 2016
Oliver in 2014
Oliver in 2014

Improved to Good Article status by MyCatIsAChonk (talk). Self-nominated at 15:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/John Oliver; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: ALT1 and IMG0 preferred. Earwig shows 65.4% copyvio with Oliver's Christ's College Alumni page as well as a Business Insider article. 〜 Festucalex • talk 12:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Festucalex: I always forget something, thanks for finding this issue. Think it's fixed now. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MyCatIsAChonk: It's at 39.4% now; please try to get it below 32%. Here's the Earwig link if you want to compare. I'm not sure how this high copyvio score wasn't caught earlier in AryKun's GA review. 〜 Festucalex • talk 16:53, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the revision of the article I passed, and I don't think there was a copyvio problem there. There were about three sentences that could be classed as copyvio; the rest was just names, stock phrases, and small factual bits that couldn't be paraphrased. I guess I should have been more insistent on changing those couple sentences, maybe, but even with what I would say is almost no copyvio, Earwig still returns almost 40%, so I'm not really sure how great a metric that is. AryKun (talk) 18:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Festucalex: Most of what it's catching are long names and quotes, so I'm not sure how I can do anything more than cut quotes. Regardless, I did my best to fix it again. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 17:39, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All good now. ALT1 and IMG0 preferred. 〜 Festucalex • talk 18:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think ALT1 is not factually correct so will promote ALT0 without objection. Bruxton (talk) 16:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Citizenship[edit]

It currently lists his citizenship as American and British. As he actively applied for US citizen (rather than getting it through accident of birth) would he not be required to reliquish his British citizenship? 51.149.8.48 (talk) 11:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, he has dual citizenship. Barry Wom (talk) 11:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. He’s been a British subject since birth and remains so. You’d have done better to have checked, or posted here, before editing the article. MapReader (talk) 13:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Political views[edit]

@Serial Number 54129, I see you've restored the addition to "Political views" that I initially reverted. This addition is not proper because this section does not go in depth into Oliver's many many beliefs on many subjects. The section is instead meant to give a general overview on his views in british politics, american politics, and other prominent issue (but summarized in para 3). Is there a particular reason you restored the addition? Thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 21:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did not "initially revert it"; I accepted the pending changes edit, which you summarily overrode. You reverted me. It was well sourced and a relevant quote. Not everything can be reduced to a word of gloss. As an FA, this should cover his career and biography in its entirety. Please immmerse youself at WP:FAC for the full background. Cheers. ——Serial Number 54129 21:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that his opposition to the death penalty merits an entire paragraph. It doesn't seem like a defining issue, so much as one of many subjects that he has an opinion on. CAVincent (talk) 21:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129 I'm still unfamiliar with the pending changes system, so apologies for making that error- should've actually looked at what the history said. There have been additions like this in the past (which were subsequently discussed and not implemented) because I believe this is undue weight to a particular area. Oliver has expressed a plethora of opinions on his show, and it's impossible to track every single one. Just look at List of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver episodes; he's done three episodes on capital punishment/lethal injections, but he's also done three on FIFA, five+ on prison systems, ten on COVID... the list of recurring themes goes on and on. Explaining all of these opinions in detail would be giving undue weight to particular issues. The short summarization paragraph instead provides a brief overview of his general beliefs, allowing the reader to look more into it on the referenced articles. This new addition should be cut because it does not align with how this section is designed. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A paragraph seems excessive especially when sourced to something he said on his show with a primary source YouTube link. – notwally (talk) 03:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted the addition for now as there appears to be a mini-consensus (including me) that it's giving undue weight to a single topic. Barry Wom (talk) 09:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Oliver&oldid=1228454686"