Talk:Ed Bradley/Archive 1

Archive 1

Retired?

Had he retired or was he still on "60 minutes" up to his death? Rmhermen 20:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

• He had not retired and in fact stated last month that he was scheduled to do 18 segments for the show this season. [1] He had a notable interview with the defendants in the Duke lacrosse rape case on the show just three weeks ago (Oct. 15). --Metropolitan90 21:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Death means a nice Wiki article

I like how generally someone has to die to get a nice Wikipedia article. Maybe we should all work on creating some good articles on people BEFORE they die. I think I will go work on that now... --Daysleeper47 21:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahmen to that. J-Dog 22:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

he will be missed...

I second that. May he rest in peace.

-- Mik 00:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

--You know, I was thinking the same thing... as of yesterday his article was short and there wasn't even a picture. Terry Randell

--He was given a tribute on Larry King Live (Nov 11, 2006). I'm new to the whole editing thing, but I'm hoping someone else can write that into the article. ashtonvk 21:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I have semi-protected this article for the time being as his death was just announced and the vandals had already struck. I didn't want to see another fiasco like Ken Lay. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 17:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I had just received a phone call and your semi-pro went into effect while on the call.--Brad Patrick 17:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

• Good Job Sir, I had came here soon as I found out and it read he died of a Shark Attack - Terry Randell
  • Yeah, thanks for that. Sad that we have to do that in order to protect ourselves from a bunch of sick (profanity removed). Excuse my French, but that's how I feel. J-Dog 17:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    • I've unprotected as it's been two days. - BanyanTree 22:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Thanks. I've bee watching the article, but I have been away all day. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 23:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
        • The protection of this article was much appreciated, but I think we ought to concentrate on the next phase of production, specifically expansion. I mean lets face facts. This article is much too short for the type of man he was. --WalksWithGrizzlies 19:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
          • I don't know how to contact someone any other way but there is more vandalism to the poor fellow's page.

Ethnicity

excuse me... but what's the point on saying he was African American? i really don't think that there is any use in that...

Well, for those who are sociologically inclined, this bit of data may be important in tracking the relative success or activities of any number of African Americans. It was not meant to be derogatory, just a matter of fact.Patris Magnus 23:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Legacy?

IMO legacy is something such as, "Left a $25M endowment for the study of the mating habits of the Brine Shrimp," or "Cured Cancer." In other words, what noticeable impact of the existence of a person remains after they die. To say that his legacy is that he excelled under adverse conditions is a comment on his life not his legacy. Patris Magnus 18:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Repeated Vandalism

I have just undone a series of edits by vandals, most of which are gay-bashing. Looking at the history, it seems to keep repeating itself. Could an admin have a look at this and maybe protect this page? Thanks. Yavoh 15:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Did he win The Emmy Award 19 times ?

I find that strange. IMDb says nothing about him winning the Emmy--Ezzex (talk) 04:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Biography

Did he ever publish a book? or perhaps a biography was written about him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.127.176.43 (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Anybody? --87.70.107.120 (talk) 14:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Lena Horne interview

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4683607n&tag=mncol;lst;9 (excerpt only) says that interview date was 12/27/81; Horne would have been 64, Bradley 40. This interview probably deserves mention on her page as well; it provided the interview "file footage" for 1991 60 Minutes: The Entertainers, and their 25th (and other) anniversary special segments with her. 75.204.151.21 (talk) 23:10, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Cause of Death

The cause of death is missing from this article. For someone as young as he was, this should be included. 70.36.142.145 (talk) 06:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ed Bradley/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

John Sears, a Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) past chairman talked to Ed Bradley about his career in his 19th year on 60 Minutes. It is very informatative and I look forward to viewing some Mr. Bradley's past interviews again soon. The interview can be read at http:// www.rtnda.org/members/communicator/edbradley1.asp. Ed Bradley will be missed.

Substituted at 06:24, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Audi blackballing

There should be a section here on how Bradley did a phony report on alleged "defects" in Audi cars ("Unintended acceleration") that nearly destroyed the company, at least in America, based on rigged tests of Audi vehicles. 76.126.150.30 (talk) 06:32, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

2016, not 2006

2016, not 2006 Dbrown4bbl (talk) 03:08, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ed Bradley. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040129013001/http://www.rtndf.org/asfi/awards/bradley.shtml to http://www.rtndf.org/asfi/awards/bradley.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061202071412/http://people.monstersandcritics.com/article_1220213.php/Ed_Bradley_remembered_on_CNNs_Larry_King to http://people.monstersandcritics.com/article_1220213.php/Ed_Bradley_remembered_on_CNNs_Larry_King

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Research project

Did a big research project on the topic [2]. Incorporated material from 100 sources. Thanks for taking a look, Princessa Unicorn (talk) 03:54, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Making improvements post first good article review

I'm going to make some improvements and take the feedback to heart after the first good article review. Princessa Unicorn (talk) 00:37, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Appreciate your work on this! I think this is pretty close. I fixed the issue with the on hold message on the page as well. Looking forward to seeing what you do with this! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Recent edits and suggestions

Hi Princessa Unicorn, thanks for all your work on this! I think you've done a great job trimming some places up that needed trimming and this article is really close, and I have made some changes to help bring it even closer. There are still three sections I have some reservations about, namely the introduction, Legacy, and Personal life. I think Legacy strays too far from talking about Bradley and Personal life has too many non-encyclopedic details. The introduction is much better but still doesn't quite meet the guidelines for leads. I have drafted some potential replacement text for these sections below that I think will get this over the hump for Good Article status; however, because these are big changes, I'll let you decide how to implement them. Because of all the changes I've made, I would also bring in another editor for a second opinion on GA status, as I think I am too connected now to make a final pronounciation. Let me know what you think of what I drafted and if you have any questions about the changes I made! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

• Note: Some citations aren't generating because the full citations appear in other sections.

Introduction

Edward Rudolph "Ed" Bradley, Jr. (June 22, 1941 – November 9, 2006) was an American journalist, best known for his reporting on 60 Minutes and CBS News. He was the first African American White House correspondent for CBS News and anchored the Sunday broadcast of the CBS Evening News. Bradley reported more than 500 stories in his career and is the recipient of multiple Emmy and Peabody awards. He died in New York City on November 9, 2006, of leukemia.

Legacy:

In 1994, Bradley and the Radio Television News Directors Association Foundation started a scholarship program in his name for journalists of color. It awards $10,000 annually. In 2005, Bradley was honored with a Lifetime Achievement Award by the National Association of Black Journalists and noted his desire to keep reporting. After Bradley's death in 2006, columnist Clarence Page noted that Bradley's inspiration to Black Americans, writing, "Mr. Bradley challenged the system. He worked hard and prepared himself. He opened himself to the world and dared the world to turn him away. He wanted to be a lot, and he succeeded. Thanks to him, the rest of us know that we can too." Bradley was named one of the "100 Outstanding American Journalists in the last 100 years" in 2012 by faculty at New York University. In 2015, the Pennsylvania State Legislature renamed City Avenue in Philadelphia "Ed Bradley Way." A mural of Bradley was completed in the city in 2018, and a historical marker was installed in 2021.

Personal life:

Bradley was fond of jazz and hosted Jazz at Lincoln Center on National Public Radio. He performed with Jimmy Buffett and the Neville Brothers and was referred to as "the fifth Neville brother" by the group.

Bradley was married three times, to Diane Jefferson, Priscilla Coolidge, and Patricia Blanchet. Bradley lived in New York and had homes in East Hampton, New York and Woody Creek, Colorado.

Bradley was diagnosed with lymphocytic leukemia, which worsened after he had heart surgery in 2003. He told few people about his illness and died at the age of 65 on November 9, 2006, at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. Following his death, he was honored with a traditional jazz funeral procession at the New Orleans Jazz Festival in 2007.

References

Reviewing updates

Hi @Mike Christie and @BlueMoonset, just wanted to let you both know, I have not forgotten about this. I'm currently in the process of doing an in-depth review of the sources, creating updated citations, and searching the archives of Google Books and Archive.org for links to things that don't currently have them. It's just a slow process. M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 16:58, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Smile

--Hdt83 ^Chat has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hdt83 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

GAN Review Highlights

For reviewing editors, I have made significant updates and changes to the article after the last GAN. Some highlights:

• Per the suggestion of Mike Christie, I have rewritten the lead to include more of the breadth of Bradley's career
• Reorganized the Career section by major period with timestamps
• Rewrote content about 60 Minutes to reduce name-dropping and divided by decades with the program
• Removed significant content in the Illness and death section that was non-encyclopedic and did not meet criteria of WP:MEMORIAL.
• Rewrote Legacy section to include additional information about Bradley's impact on fashion and his reporting style
• Added subsection to include Bradley's posthumous honors to Legacy section
• Cut tabloid content from Personal life section per WP:NOTSCANDAL
• Reworked Recognition table to remove extraneous wikilinks, add award names, remove unsourced awards
• Removed unnecessary links from External links and reworked links to fit current style conventions
• Removed extraneous citations
• Re-cited article to deal with WP:OVERCITE issues
• Re-did all citations to fit current citation guidelines
• Removed an image I could not verify was properly released

Please ping me directly if you have additional suggestions or any questions. Cheers M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 05:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ed Bradley/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shearonink (talk · contribs) 21:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

• No obvious Quick-fail issues. Stable/no edit-warring, no maintenance tags, per Earwig's Copyvio tool - no copyright violations. Shearonink (talk) 21:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   To the point, very spare in its style - definitely not a hagiography which I appreciate very much. Shearonink (talk) 23:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Very much so. I can find no fault with its layout. Shearonink (talk) 00:17, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   Oh! And no weasel words either...nicely done. Shearonink (talk) 00:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   Thanks! I really tried to cut all of those. M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 03:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Style-wise the refs agree with the MOS etc. Shearonink (talk) 21:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: {{GAList/check|yes}

   I have just started going through the cites but one jumps out at me - Ref #31 is almost a bare URL and needs more detail (especially the date). Shearonink (talk) 23:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref#14/The New York Times obit. The Times is behind a subscription-only paywall. If you institute a wayback machine/webarchive linkage that will enable verifiability. Shearonink (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref #54 - misspells the word "annual" in the article/pdf title. Shearonink (talk) 00:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref #10 - <ref name="CBS8"> - is both his CBS bio and his obituary. The bio-date is July 8, 1998 and then it appears to have been updated at the time of Bradley's death in 2006. The dates need to be added. Also, I think that linkrot could be a real issue with this URL, I would check to see if it's been archived and add that info to the cite. Shearonink (talk) 00:15, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref #5/Ebony magazine/The Way They Were - lacks Page # and author. If author isn't spelled out, then "Staff" is acceptable. Shearonink (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref #9 - LexisNexis is behind a paywall. Shearonink (talk) 03:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)z

   Ref #56 - Radio Television Digital News Association/Past Honorees. dead link. Shearonink (talk) 03:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref #33 - As it pertains to this sentence "In 2007, he was inducted into the Broadcast Pioneers Hall of Fame by the Broadcast Pioneers of Philadelphia." is somewhat problematic. I think this sentence needs to be adjusted to make it clear that the Broadcast Pioneers are not (possibly) a nationwide organization but a local/Philadelphia group, something along the lines of "In 2007, he was inducted into the Broadcast Pioneers of Philadelphia's Hall of Fame." Shearonink (talk) 21:25, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

   Ref #44 - "ABC, PBS lead news Emmy nominees". The author is credited as "Staff", so that should be added rather than left blank. Shearonink (talk) 21:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

   Thanks for going through with that level of detail! Here's what I did:

   • Ref 5:  Partly done Page number added! Template:Cite news says not to add "staff" or similar descriptions to the authorship of an source (typically this also generates a "generic name" error message, but that isn't happening here for some reason). Instead it says to add background text saying the author was not stated. I've done so on this cite.
   • Ref 9:  Done I added quotes from the article in question to the cite. Let me know if that works!
   • Ref 10:  Partly done This one is weird. It's not clear when the page was updated (oldest archive link is December 2021), and I don't want to add the old, clearly incorrect date here. I did add an archive link. If you have any thoughts on what to do about the date I'm all ears!
   • Ref 14:  Done Archive link added!
   • Ref 31:  Partly done This one is tricky. Template:USBill is just kind of strange. I tried something here I think fills out the ref a bit more but looks a bit weird IMO, let me know what you think!

   Looks good. The date is the main thing I was looking for. Otherwise it would have been incomplete. Shearonink (talk) 14:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

   • Ref 33:  Done That wording is much better! Great suggestion!
   • Ref 44:  Partly done This is another instance where Template:Cite news says not to add generic names, so I added the background text like I did with cite 5
   • Ref 54  Done fixed!
   • Ref 56:  Done archive link added!

   M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 04:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

   I spotted some more "annunals". Rather than bother you, I went ahead and corrected the spelling. Hope you don't mind. Shearonink (talk) 05:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

   Not at all! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 03:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

   One last reference issue:

   Ref # 42 - "Past Winners". Long Island University. Retrieved October 23, 2022. Needs more detail, as in Past Winners of *what*. In this case it's the George Polk Awards which is a Wikipedia article and should be linked within the citation. Shearonink (talk) 14:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

    Done I updated it in a way I think fits the parameters. @Shearonink: Let me know if that works for you! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 03:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

   This section is a Yes now. Shearonink (talk) 05:15, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

   C. It contains no original research:

   Statement about the person are backed up with references. Shearonink (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Ran Earwig's tool. Looking good. Shearonink (talk) 21:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   Covers the facts but with information that adds to the reader's understanding of the man. Shearonink (talk) 00:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   At first I thought the information about the earring was trivia but realized I only think that because I am looking at it from now and not from then. Shearonink (talk) 00:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

   I had that thought at first too. Enough reporting out there about it changed my mind. M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 03:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   Detected no POV bs. Shearonink (talk) 14:29, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   Very stable. Shearonink (talk) 21:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Valid copyright licenses. Shearonink (talk) 23:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   All of the images are relevant and placed appropriately within the text. Shearonink (talk) 23:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   All the other parameters are fine. The references just need a bit of fine-tuning. As soon as that is done/discussed, I think I'll be able to finish this GA2 up. Shearonink (talk) 21:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

   Thanks you for those adjustments to the various references mentioned in 2B above. I am going to give the article another couple deep read-throughs to make sure I didn't miss anything but everything looks good. Shearonink (talk) 05:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

   One last reference issue to take care of please, then I'll finish up this GA Nom/Review. Almost there... Shearonink (talk) 14:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

   All issues taken care of. Fulfills the GA criteria. Congrats, it's a GA. Shearonink (talk) 05:15, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.