Talk:Don Lemon

This seems significant to include.

https://www.fox9.com/news/department-justice-investigating-anti-ice-protest-st-paul-church?utm_source=chatgpt.com ~2026-39800-2 (talk) 07:19, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

agreed MyMets (talk) 04:17, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Not a reliable source Doug Weller talk 09:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes a reliable source. Fox affiliates are considered distinct from Fox News. ~2026-72444-1 (talk) 11:05, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I missed that. Doug Weller talk 13:32, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

It's a powerful MAGA/Christian Nationalist church. It isn't apolitical. Doug Weller talk 09:46, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Article is nothing but a bunch of guilt-by-association bs. Source is unreliable anyway. ~2026-72444-1 (talk) 10:59, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

You must know that it’s not listed as RSNP. You seem to prefer rightwing sources. Doug Weller talk 13:21, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Several key details are omitted from the description of the church attack (covered in RS here and here). ~2026-72444-1 (talk) 10:58, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

[ is still better, Doug Weller talk 13:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Slate used to be listed as "additional considerations" AFAIK. The Beacon is GREL.

My preference is for the full truth, which has been omitted from all other RS so far (even though the Beacon's assertions are all easily verifiable via Lemon's own footage). ~2026-72444-1 (talk) 14:13, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

So? Slate is no longer listed. And maybe your “full truth” isn’t in RS because it’s fake news. Doug Weller talk 16:28, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Two links were provided to top-tier RS (see RSP), so it is in RS. Your disagreement does not override community consensus. You know this.

Either provide references to comparable RS explicitly casting doubt on the Beacon's reporting, or strike your "fake news" accusation. Thank you. ~2026-88208-1 (talk) 10:55, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

It seems to me that the "Reaction to the Arrest" section would benefit from at least one sentence acknowledging that some RS commentators have criticized Lemon for interfering with First Amendment (free exercise of religion) rights of churchgoers, as in these Boston Globe and Wall Street Journal pieces. I agree that it is not quite NPOV the way it stands now. Jameson Nightowl (talk) 02:35, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't think these opinions bear the same journalistic weight as proper articles. --Denniss (talk) 03:16, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

The "Reaction" section now features a press statement from the ACLU that was published through "Yubanet." I have no problem with including the ACLU's view, but does that really have more journalistic weight than op-eds in major newspapers? The RS treatment of this issue is more nuanced than the article currently represents. Jameson Nightowl (talk) 01:25, 5 February 2026 (UTC)