Talk:Connie Schultz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

catholic hatred[edit]

does anyone care that she has said bigoted things about catholicism including that it should lose its tax exempt status. Peppermintschnapps (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone care that Peppermintschnapps left out the bit Schultz saying that the Catholic Church should lose its tax exempt status if the Catholic bishops continue meddling in politics? JHobson2 (talk) 11:32, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
no religious officiant should meddle in u.s. politics--none
since your posting, how're ya feelin' about the christian nationalists and theocratic authoritarians trying to overthrow democracy? 2601:401:8200:8D50:7CA6:3D2:1368:E1EB (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ConnieSchultz.jpg[edit]

Image:ConnieSchultz.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My recent edits[edit]

If you have a problem with my recent edits please discuss them with me here. Also, please don't throw the baby out with the bath water. I find it highly unlikely that you found all of my edits to be objectionable.Organthief1949 (talk) 12:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Life section[edit]

I deleted the Personal Life section because it had no sources, and a citation needed tag had been in place since August.Catherinejarvis (talk) 17:28, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Her work[edit]

A WP entry about a journalist should explain what she wrote about and why people think she is good enough to deserve all those awards. At least, it should link to the actual Pulitzer award http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/connie-schultz which answers those questions and gives samples of her work that won the award. I just came here to find that information. I'll try to work on the entry later. --Nbauman (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Connie Schultz. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 01:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ed schultz[edit]

really super-bogus to not even mention connie's first husband, ed schultz--proud pro-labor journalist, and a real friend to progressives

ed likely took a job specifically because it offered medical insurance, which connie desperately needed at the time, as she had been diagnosed with cancer and ed had just been fired from MSNBC...this was months before he died, and many felt the depression he had at working for RT may have debilitated his physical self--this is purely conjecture, and certainly not connie's fault, either...life just happens, sometimes 2601:401:8200:8D50:7CA6:3D2:1368:E1EB (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source for this information? If so it can be included. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]