Talk:Armond White

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Journalism Unassessed

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Citations? Proof?

Any proof that White it influential? That a review of his has been "widely-read"? That he has been "the most forceful and intellectually stimulating defender of films by Steven Spielberg", etc.? This reads as if it was written by White's press agent. If multiple, independent sources don't appear in the next few days I'm going to begin removing all of this. --Patchyreynolds (talk) 03:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How are these prove-able claims? White's paper has a quarter of a million circulation, and he is frequently put on the paper's cover so that he is widely-read seems beyond dispute. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.131.152 (talk) 07:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New York Press had a circulation barely over 100,000 in 2006, so it is probably lower now. It is also a free weekly so it's hard to guage how well read he is. Rottentomatoes does not even list him as a "top critic." I would say that this whole "bio" sounds as if it was written by Mr. White himself, in order to extoll his own importance. If you read through it, the ENTIRE thing is about how wonderful and influential he is. Even the "negative" things are mentioned in passing and used to demonstrate his influence and power. I think that just about the whole thing should be scrapped. Really, I would not be surprised in the slightest to learn that this was written by Mr. White. Take for exampled the "ten number ones" or whatever the hell it is at the end. I haven't a clue what that even means, but it is strong evidence of a self important individual writing things up for himself without thinking it necessary to give background information because it is self evident to himself. That or his grandiose vision of himself leads him to believe that everyone will know what it is already. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.129.174 (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that he is an award-winning film critic. He did not win any award for being a film critic, he won an award for being a music critic. If I won an award in a piano playing competition, then went on to play violin I couldn't tout myself as an award-winning violinist, could I? . Nino137.111.47.29 (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]