Talk:Ehren Watada

message: Okay, what the hell, I was using exactly the defn:
A conscientious objector is an individual following the religious, moral or ethical dictates of their conscience that are incompatible: (1) with being a combatant in military service, or (2) being part of the armed forces as a combatant organization. In the first case, conscientious objectors may be willing to accept non-combatant roles during conscription or military service. 
And my rationale:
(Watada by his own words is neither opposed to combatant status or participation in a combatant organization - he is not a consencious objector)
Watada has no general objection to war or combatant status - he would have been happy to go to Afghanistan. However, he has a specific dispute with the Iraq War, which does not qualify for conscientious objector. Moreover, you reverted my copyedits - have you any dispute with those?
--Mmx1 16:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think you'll find the answers in the Oath...I'll look it up tomorrow but basically at commissioning and thereafter untill officers reach retirement age they "serve at the pleasure of the President" essentially means that the President can call back to federal service any former officers. It's not just limited to wartime. Interestingly, the soon to be former Army Chief of Staff, General Schoomaker (spelling?) was recalled to Active Duty after two and half years on retirement. TurboManiacal 19:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Officer and enlisted extensions are different. When a person enlists into the military, there is a clause on the DD4 (I am summarizing) that states that their enlistment may extended in war or national emergencies as needed, we call this Stop loss, John Kerry called it, erroneously, a "back-door draft." It is legal, it is a portion of the contract signed by every service member when the enlist, and re-enlist. Remember, any entry into service, enlisted or Officer, is for a period of 8 years the first time. This is called the Military Service Obligation. That 8 years of service can be any combination of Active Duty, drilling reserve, and Individual Ready Reserve. For enlisted members, when that 8 years passes, if they do not reenlist/extend their service, then their obligation ends. For Officers, on the other hand, they must undertake resigning their Commission to be obligated, beyond the MSO. Many do not resign, since a Commission is for life, and the title may be retained so long as the person's commission is active. But, the danger is the possibility of being recalled. Because Officers do not reenlist, instead they go on Voluntary Indefinite status, there is no need to require a contractual agreement that they may be extended, since indefinite means indefinite. Sorry for the ramble. Andrew 14:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karada's reverts 

message: I think this page was vandalized here Qrc2006 20:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: All the discussion on his guilt or innocence is moot until one reads the actual wording of the first set of laws he is subject to. He is subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and will be tried in accordance with the Manual for Courts Marshall. Google these or look for them on Wikipedia. If you go by the letter of the law, he is 100% in the wrong. Accusations in the article of politicizing the charges are in effect, trying to politicize them in the reverse, favorable way for the defendant. His 'Constitutional Rights' are not an issue, they are trying to make it one. Civilian lawyers such as those in the ACLU, do not have a grasp on the real issue, only the political one. If this man truely believes in what he is saying, he will take his punishment for his offences, which are real. This article is so heavily biased it's not funny. Without a true opposing point of view, how can it have ANY credibility?
Joe in Maine
This is not your blog, Joe in Maine. Your own conclusions on Ehren's case don't belong here (not even in the discussion page).
The article itself should not make its own cases about guilt or innocence, but rather should be an overview of both sides' cases, citing actual publicized arguments (as in, this is what experts are saying about Watada). I think the article does that well.
Please, either cite some instances of POV, or do not bring it up.WallyCuddeford 05:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  UCMJ 

message: Hello--I would suggest possibly separating the passage
"The Army refused his resignation. Watada has said he is not a conscientious objector because he is not opposed to war as a principle, only the war in Iraq, and so offered to serve in Afghanistan,[7] which he regarded as "an unambiguous war linked to the Sept. 11 attacks." This was also refused. Watada, in turn, refused an offer for a desk job in Iraq without direct combat involvement.[4] Lt. Watada's initial term of service ends on December 3, 2006; however, the US Army may choose to extend its officers' tours of duty at its discretion."
from the education section of this listing, as it doesn't seem that this information properly fills out the education portion of this biographical entry.
--J.C., Tacoma, WA
Desouragons 11:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content Separation 

message: I've posted links to the 1/16/2007 rulings; the Nuremberg defence ruling in particular is notable. However I hope another editor can upgrade those links to a more official site; the document I linked to came straight to me (on request) from the defense attorney, who got it from the court, but it would be better to link straight to the court. Unfortunately, cts don't always keep their websites up to the minute. rewinn 20:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jan 16. 2007 Rulings

message: I got a (decent, but I'm afraid not great) photo of Watada addressing a rally for Martin Luther King Day in Seattle. I leave it to someone else to decide whether it would be a positive addition to the article. - Jmabel | Talk 06:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image, use if you wish 

message: Also, I found a potentially interesting link, probably the most extensive interview with Watada that I've seen. Rather than just add it to the external links, I'm mentioning it here in case anyone wants to "mine" it for material. After a brief introduction, it is apparently a verbatim transcript:
* Ken Mochizuki, Lt. Watada explains his risky stand in extensive interview, International Examiner, Jan. 17 – Feb. 6, 2007 (Volume 34 No. 02). p. 1, 6–7.
The International Examiner, calls itself the "Journal of the Northwest Asican Pacific American Communities" and pretty much lives up to the self-designation. It's pretty serious newspaper; I'd certainly consider it a reliable source. It's been around over 30 years, has a paid staff, and has even published a couple of books. - Jmabel | Talk 20:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: An interesting link

message: Please, let's be reasonable here and realize that the word 'coward' is a loaded term and shouldn't be used in the article., your personal beliefs aside. Someone's been littering this guy's article with that word. Let's take a measured approach.
:I disagree. The man is being labeled a "coward" by many in the military as well as the public. It is a fact, not a value judgement, to include this.
:: It's go without saying that American "patriots", like panzertank (seems like a neo-nazi handle to me), are preventing this page to stay on a NPOV level of quality, that is, this article is highly biased towards the past and current American foreign policy, and must be considered as partial unless someone step forward and lock indefinitely the page. (Anonymous Coward) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.19.141.77 (talk) 00:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are some people so afraid to include the FACT that Watada has been called a "coward" by many people, both civilian and military? We aqren't saying he IS a coward, simply that he is being CALLED such. It seems that PC has run amok on this site.63.211.139.170 00:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a matter of fear, but wikiPolicy concerning biographies of living people. If you don't like that policy, start your own site. rewinn 00:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, to the war-hawks and opponents, I am a US Army Officer, I serve proudly, will go when called, and do not approve of Watada's actions. But, I do believe Lt. Watada deserves a fair and unbiased accounting of his actions. You can make your decisions privately- whether you agree or disagree with the war-please do not do it by defacing the wiki page for Lt. Watada. Specifically to 63.211.139.170, your sloppy insertion of the word "coward" to make your point was in no way in keeping with the NPOV of Wikipedia. It is you who are paranoid about PC, rather than liberal bias running amok here. If you would like to engage me in a shouting match, feel free, it will be one sided, since I have already said my piece. Andrew 01:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Any time somebody refuses to take part in a war, for whatever reasons (principled or selfish) they will be called a hero by some and a coward by others. I think it's a valid use of these words to state objectively that Lt. Watada is called a hero by his supporters and a coward by his detractors without violating NPOV. But the article certainly shouldn't be littered with either term. But when the words are used properly, it helps put it into more perspective when a detractor (the prosecutor, in this case) claims the defendant is sincere in his beliefs. --MiguelMunoz 03:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's less a question of NPOV or of libel, but of noteworthiness. For balance, if the article mentions that some call him a hero it should also mention that some call him a coward; however, neither fact is notable. Public figures get called a lot of things, and if wikipedia were to list them all, the entries for George W Bush or Michael Moore would be unmanagably long. rewinn 03:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can follow the argument that a first-time draft-dodger might be considered a possible coward, but since Lt. Watada has served several hitches in battle prior to refusing the Iraq deployment, and has said he'd willingly serve in Afghanistan, it's clear that he is NOT a coward; while people ignorant of this fact-- or simple noisemakers-- might label him a coward, this would be a very obvious misnomer and lend an undeserved respectability to the people trying to attach the label to him. This would be akin to Wikipedia endorsing the math skills of children by saying that "some people think 2+2=5". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sethnessatwikipedia (talk • contribs) 11:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Original research concerning the state of mind of the Lt. is not encyclopedic. The article is a biography of a living person; this Talk page is about that biography, not about your feelings about the Lt. Please confine your remarks to ways to improve the article with verifiable facts. If you don't like that policy, start your own site. rewinn 23:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism, 'Coward'

message: I added the semi-protection tag. I realize it should be discussed first, but since this is a "lesser known personality" and the page was frequently being vandalized, I added it, to prevent any more defacing that would potentially destroy the page. For instance, I had to "void" several edits, due to a slew of vandalizing statements being inserted this evening February 7. Tnkr111 01:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine someone decided to remove the "semi-protection tag," <sprotect2>. Can and admin add it. The vandalism on this page is getting ridiculous. And it seems to primarily originate from users who are not "logged in." Andrew 14:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this article should be protected. Wikipedia should not be a place where people are allowed to voice their bias and hate. Bernhard --62.245.160.16 00:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone can request page protection at WP:RPP. RJASE1  Talk  01:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-Protection and Watada's right to unbiased accounting 

message: SamiKaero added the NPOV tag with an edit summary of "yeah, he learnt history of Iraq, and got interested in iraq's culture and that's why he is far more intelligent than every other people(and general) and why it's normal to contradict his superiors..." with no further discussion. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to whomever removed the frivolously added NPOV tag, however, the tag being added may beg a larger question. Can this article truly remain neutral when a great deal of the information is supported by references that point to clearly biased sources (peace advocacy groups and a website set up by his own mother)? Despite the bias of the majority of the media tending to be supprotive of his claims, despite the clear illegality of them under UCMJ, I would tend to think that they are much better at conveying the facts of this case sans editorial comment like that found at places like Common Dreams, Truthout, and ThankYouLt. Andrew 17:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am in agreeance with the most recent edits you have made, with one exception (see your Talk page), which I see you had addressed here, I'll find the reference, perhaps I linked the wrong article. IIRC, the original edits you had made seemed to discount the fact that there are manifestly different, albeit similar, rules under the UCMJ. I would contend however that stating that "double jeopardy does not apply" is not an opinion, it is a matter of fact, the judge said no prosecutorial misconduct, and therefore, the MCCM allows for a retrial. If your issue is the wording of double jeopardy, fine, however, the fact is that he may be tried again if the Army wishes, and with the setting of a date for a new CM, I guess they've done just that. I am not a lawyer, but I am reasonably familiar with the UCMJ and the MCM, as I am bound by it, and use it in the discharge of my official command duties. As fro reverting some of the previous edits, the words "leveled charge against" seem pretty weaselish to me, and some of your earlier edits seemed to indicate a bias against the military justice system. I could be wrong, please forgive me if I have misinterpreted them.—Andrew 12:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I linked the wrong article. However, the statements correctly referenced in the Court-Martial section do convey the same idea. Whether the chain of command disputes his "claim of an offer to serve in Afghanistan" or that they find it in opposition to his written statement, is the same thing. Good catch, it removed redundant material, improperly cited.— Andrew 13:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Should we mention the very similar trial of Malcolm Kendall-Smith, the RAF medic who refused to serve a second tour in Iraq and was sentenced to eight months imprisonment in 2006? The issues seem to be largely identical. Lisiate 20:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, definitely. Asabbagh 07:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to but I'm not sure where to put it. In the opening paragraph or in the charges or court martial parts?Lisiate 21:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Malcolm Kendall-Smith]]

message: * "Ehren Watada (born 1978) is a First Lieutenant in the United States Army"
:In this instance, "first lieutenant" should be in lower case, as it is not referring to a specific person. Reference: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Titles
* Similarly:
:"as a Second Lieutenant of Field Artillery"
:"ten Officers down to seven, holding the rank of Captain through Lieutenant Colonel."
* For consistency, if we abbreviate one rank, then all should be abbreviated, thus:
:"Lieutenant Colonel Mark Keith presided" should be "Lt. Col. Mark Keith presided"
:And the same for "Colonel Ann Wright"
--Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All valid points. I did not consult the manual of style. I simply capitalized the rank, due to the habits I have as a US Army Officer. As for abbreviating the rank, I would disagree. They should be spelled out in full the first time mentioned, and then abbreviated thereafter. However, I would not belabor the point, if you feel abbreviation is better. As for the entire, article, I am of the mind that it needs a complete and thorough edit. There is a lot of information present but it is sloppily compiled, as it appears the article has been a patchwork affair as the case develops- leading to gaps, choppy reading, and redundancy in some cases. Thoughts?—Andrew 21:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It does need work- there seems to have been a lot of additions and reverts. AP style is to abbreviate (I have had to change my ways as well). I do belive that AP and others have started to capitalize Soldiers. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure about AP, but the U.S. Army now requires Soldiers to be capitalized in any correspondence, similar to the Marine Corps requirement of Marine. I am in agreement to do so, if we can achieve consensus. I am fine with abbreviation, since many of the sources will do so as well, and in the lexicon of written English, these abbreviations are not "foreign."—Andrew 01:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style issues 

message: If I may propose some changes to the organization of this article. I beleive this would present the information in a more logical manner:
* Background
* Iraq
* Charges and hearing
* Court-martial
* Mistrial
:Include positions on retrial
* Public response
--Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout 

message: * All of the See Also references are already linked in the article, so these are redundant.
* Most of the External links are actually references that should either be worked into the article or deleted. The Manual for Courts-Martial is linked in both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Manual for Courts-Martial articles.
--Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Also's list of Iraq War Resisters is getting unwieldy so I created List of Iraq War Resisters and added a link. rewinn 04:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also and External links 

message: For the sake of clarity, I separated the objective fact that a new hearing has been set from the controversy over double jeopardy. The former is an indisputed fact; the latter is a controvery for which both sides should be presented (if either side is) in a brief way. I would suggest not devoting too much space to the issue since (a) it would be better to link to double jeopardy and similar resources, and (b) in any event the Army could simply order Watada to join his unit a 2nd time, and try him on that. rewinn 17:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jeopardy

message: Ehren Watada was in Seattle on January 27, 2007 giving a speech at the Langston Hughes Center around 3 p.m. pacific time. This article claims he was in D.C. on that day. I don't think so. this unsigned comment on 20:34, 18 February 2007 by 65.249.52.125
:I have editted the text to make it more clear that the reference is to Lt. Watada's father, not to Lt. Watada himself. rewinn 22:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Public reaction section

message: Preferred is wrongly used throughout. Different word, different meaning. It should be corrected ASAP as it just looks awful and discredits the entire article.Gs3 17 May 2007
: Neut Nuttinbutter (talk) 02:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Not preferred but proffered

message: I think most people will agree that AP is a more NPOV news sources than http://pww.org and such. PWW.org is proudly partisan (its motto is "We take sides...Yours!") and there's nothing wrong with that, but when it comes to an encyclopedia, AP is a better citation since it's less likely to introduce questions of politics. rewinn 15:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AP vs. pww.org

message: It appears that the first paragraph contains a serious error. Erhen Watada failed to make shipment, he was present at all times, agreed to alternative duties and was never charged with either desertion or absence without leave. EdEKit (talk) 19:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Charges of Desertion. 

message: Louis Font became the first West Point graduate to refuse to serve in a war. Army Special Forces officer Donald Duncan (Army officer) gained brief fame in 1966 when he refused to participate further in "sickening" practices.
Howard Levy (Army officer), an Army dermatologist, tired of training Green Beret troops to treat Vietnamese children while the U.S. was daily bombing villages and killing untold numbers of civilians. Levy was court-martialed and spent three years in prison. Bnguyen (talk) 02:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How many other officers refused to serve in Iraq, and what happened to them? GetLinkPrimitiveParams (talk) 20:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see List of Iraq War resisters (...incomplete of course...) rewinn (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Other US military against the war (prior history)

message: Hello, Hello, Hello.
I have no idea how this thing works here. No idea whatsoever. I wish to state there are several instances of false information. How do I go about discussing this, changing it, whatever needs to be done to rectify it?
For instance this statement:
"The judge ruled that the court-martial was unable to decide the question of whether the deployment order was unlawful, and decided to strike Watada's stipulation"
No that was not whatsoever what the judge ruled. I personally was in the court room that day and actually took notes on my laptop, plus there is readily available what Judge Head actually said.
The point was that Ehren had stipulated to FACT that he missed movement, but he PLEAD not guilty. The government in pretrial agreements accepted Ehren's stipulation of fact AND they accepted his plea of not guilty. At the time of the court martial there was a new prosecuter who actually stated, "I think there is a meeting, there is an agreement, the defendant wants to raise the why, of course we disagree?
It may be very difficult for any one in the military to understand this who has contributed to or edited this article. Judge Head in his ruling stated that by signing the stipulation of missing movement he had admitted guilt. However, he did not enter a guilty plea and this arrangement had been ACCEPTED in the pretrial hearings. By calling the mistrial erroneously (as was ruled in Federal Court), Judge Head not only prevented Ehren from presenting his own testimony, he also prevented the trial from going forward to whatever conclusion it might have come to.
There are actually so many errors in this article it's just uncalled for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robin1954 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  False information in this article 

message: Somewhere between the AfD nomination and now, the following sections got duplicated, so they contain two instances of the same information out of chronological order:
 2.2.2 Preliminary discussions
 2.3 Court-martial and aftermath
 2.3.1 Initial pleadings and mistrial <-- redundancy begins here
 2.4 Attempted retrial and double jeopardy
 2.4.1 Case closing and discharge
It looks like this may be a little more complicated to stitch this back together because the text is not exactly duplicated; things are paraphrased.
By the way, I think it would be foolish to rename this article to the name of the case. Nobody is familiar with the name of the case, but everyone who knows about the events involved is likely to be familiar with Watada's name. Per WP:NC we're supposed to use the most popular name, usually measured in Google hits. Regardless of what people decided at AfD, Watada's name has several orders of magnitude more ghits than the name of the case. Ginger Conspiracy (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology got screwed up 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ehren Watada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060613192019/http://www.thenewstribune.com:80/news/military/story/5795894p-5178126c.html to http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/military/story/5795894p-5178126c.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:51, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ehren Watada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071230023809/http://www.thankyoult.org:80/mmedia/statement.html to http://www.thankyoult.org/mmedia/statement.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120530025238/http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/172/ to http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/172/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120530024813/http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/179/ to http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/179/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081012013924/http://www.thankyoult.org/content/view/44/23/ to http://www.thankyoult.org/content/view/44/23/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928001314/http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/5722/ to http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/5722/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130517201507/http://www.kpua.net/news.php?id=11275 to http://www.kpua.net/news.php?id=11275
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120303074849/http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/178/ to http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/178/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080907200204/http://www.wartribunal.net/ to http://www.wartribunal.net/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ehren Watada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110604091140/http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-briefs6.5feb06,1,4078456.story?ctrack=1&cset=true to http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-briefs6.5feb06,1,4078456.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090205002947/http://www.thankyoult.org/images/stories/2007_10_5__fed_ct_-_watadastayorder.pdf to http://www.thankyoult.org/images/stories/2007_10_5__fed_ct_-_watadastayorder.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110604061411/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/06/ap/national/main4996960.shtml to http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/06/ap/national/main4996960.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ehren Watada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120306040040/http://www.thenewstribune.com/partners/theolympian/story/903173.html to http://www.thenewstribune.com/partners/theolympian/story/903173.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:01, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ehren Watada. 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/20080116094132/http://www.undemocracy.com:80/S-RES-1511(2003)/page_1 to http://www.undemocracy.com/S-RES-1511(2003)/page_1
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/06/ap3401677.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thankyoult.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:35, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Ehren Watada. 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/20060608031029/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003044627_nogo7m.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003044627_nogo7m.html
*Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20060620223327/http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1870677.php to http://armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1870677.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060711191226/http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06%2F07%2F07%2F1356221 to http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06%2F07%2F07%2F1356221
*Added  tag to http://www.theolympian.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20060817%2FNEWS01%2F60817012
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070218070838/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003560267_watada7m0.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003560267_watada7m0.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604061413/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003654034_watada06m.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003654034_watada06m.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081025052909/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008295492_watadaruling22m.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008295492_watadaruling22m.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014184544/http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3511&Itemid=10 to http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3511&Itemid=10
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:17, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified