Talk:US President Biden says Russian President Putin must be ousted
CNBC? edit
@SVTCobra: not sure what you got from the CNBC source that wasn't available elsewhere. --JJLiu112 (talk) 06:16, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- It was just one of the three sources I had read before I started writing. This did end up a little shorter than I first intended and as you noticed I didn't even add categories. I have now removed CNBC so as to ease a review if it is entirely redundant. BTW, not asking you to change name back, but ouster (see number 3) is a perfectly good word. --SVTCobra 06:32, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- I tell you the truth, I've never heard of it (first impression seemed like a typo, as in the verb person who ousts) and anyway it seems either localised or in disuse. But I take it, I should consult before renaming. Nonetheless, 'ousted' is anecdotally more common in use. JJLiu112 (talk) 07:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Review of revision 4670609 [Passed] edit
Revision 4670609 of this article has been reviewed by JJLiu112 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 07:06, 27 March 2022 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 4670609 of this article has been reviewed by JJLiu112 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 07:06, 27 March 2022 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
phrase "must be ousted" may be misleading edit
That is not what was said, verbatim. Titling the article like that imparts a bias as to what was meant or implied by the president. 2601:80:4680:9ED0:39D6:59DF:C2C2:C011 (talk) 11:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- As it wasn’t aroundbquotation marks, it is understood to mean “he generally indicated these remarks”, rather than it was a direct quote. JJLiu112 (talk) 20:54, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
A contributor has requested that an edit be made to this protected page. Once this request is completed by an administrator, please remove this template.
You may wish to ask for the help of a volunteer to make your requested edit.A contributor has requested that an edit be made to this protected page. Once this request is completed by an administrator, please remove this template.
You may wish to ask for the help of a volunteer to make your requested edit.- I've long been uncomfortable with this headline making such a claim, and I still am. The IP, above, put it best. It wasn't in quotation marks, yes. It's still a problem, in that we apparently interpreted Biden's intent rather than merely reporting on the facts of what he said. Should a {{correction}} be issued on the basis of neutrality? Heavy Water (talk) 01:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)