Talk:2016 Republican Party presidential debates and forums/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Fields for Debate inclusions

For upcoming debates, I'm posting this to ensure that editors know which templates to use for each candidates' inclusion status, likely announced on August 4 by Fox News. The following are codes for each type of field:
Participant:{{Yes|'''P}} Secondary:{{YS|'''S}} Invitee:{{Unofficial|'''I}} Invitee (Secondary):{{Unofficial2|'''IS}} Absent:{{Yes-No|'''A}} Not Invited:{{No|'''N}} Out of race/exploring:{{n/a|'''O}}

The table below illustrates how these should appear in the complete table:

Debates among candidates for the 1824 U.S. Presidential Election
N°.	Date	Place	Sponsor	Participants*
P  Participant, main debate.  S  Participant, secondary debate.  IP  Invitee (to a future primetime debate).  IS  Invitee (to a future secondary debate).  N  Non-invitee.  A  Absent invitee.  O  Out of race (exploring or withdrawn).				Andrew Jackson	John Quincy Adams	Wm. H. Crawford	Henry Clay	John C. Calhoun	Smith Thompson
1	Feb. 6, 1824	Federal Hall, New York City	National Intelligencer	P	S	I	A	N	O
2	Apr. 30, 1824	Independence Hall, Philadelphia	Pittsburgh Mercury	P	P	S	S	IS	O

  Spartan7W §   22:05, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The TABLE is going well; I refer to it to keep up to date, myself. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 06:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

I noticed the table wasn't consistent with the legend (I vs IP). Which is correct? Cookieo131 (talk) 04:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Conservative vs Mainstream commentators

It seems that there is an active effort on this page to point out the small minority of mainstream commentators which were critical of the CNBC moderators, while there is zero mention of the fact that the vast majority of the criticism was coming from conservative commentators. News sources quoting the candidates and the RNC do not equal criticism of the commentators.

Why were my additions of conservative sources deleted? It seems to me that it is relevant to point out what conservative commentators were saying.

There is also no mention of the mainstream commentators' support of the moderators and CNBC's substantive line of questioning. ParkH.Davis (talk) 03:20, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Here on the TALK discussion page, do you want to provide some of the best references for your point? -- AstroU (talk) 11:57, 2 November 2015 (UTC) -- It can certainly be agreed this is major!

Here's one [1] with an excellent short video. Here's another ref: [2] -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 12:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

"Carson slams reporters over questions about his past" by Tal Kopan, CNN[3] -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Nov 20th Debate

On the schedule when you click on the link for the Nov 20th debate it goes nowhere. Also there does not seem to be a summary of that debate in the article. It shows who participated but there isnt a summary.

Added the Nov 20 forum. Thanks. Cookieo131 (talk) 02:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Forums

If we're adding forums, might I also suggest the RJC? Everybody but Rand Paul was present. 10:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimpire (talk • contribs)

Added the RJC. Thanks. Cookieo131 (talk) 02:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)