Talk:Vienna summit

message: The following would make the article easier to get into:
* What was the stated purpose of the summit?  As it is, it sounds like they met for the sake of meeting and talked about random stuff (which might actually have been the case, but if so, it would be nice if it were mentioned explicitly (and more formally)).
* What was the political climate, and what was the process that led up to the summit?  This would make easier to understand why it was initially considered a diplomatic triumph.  It would also be nice background knowledge for putting the summit in context.
-- Saligron 00:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of context 

message: Taking a look at the article and then at BBC's articles about the Summit, I'm coming upon two different conclusions:
"However, it may seem, in retrospect, to have been a failure. The two leaders became increasingly frustrated at the lack of progress of the negotiations. After the summit, Khrushchev realized he had underestimated Kennedy. Kennedy, meanwhile, felt that he had to avoid giving the same impression of weakness which he had demonstrated before the summit, and felt he had demonstrated to Khrushchev during the summit. He later claimed of Khrushchev, "He beat the hell out of me." [article]
"As a result of the summit, Khrushchev thought of Kennedy as weak, and thought that he would crumble under pressure. He said that he pitied the American people because they had this leader. As a result of this, Khrushchev didn't fear US retaliation in the future Cuban Missile Crisis." 
Is it possible for anyone to clear up what really was the outcome of the Summit?
Felinius 04:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading Information? 

message: You find this evidence of a "huge Kennedy apologist"?  The article, as I first saw it, made it sound as if the Bay of Pigs had been entirely a Kennedy projected.  I noted that it was planned under Ike's admin.  Also, I changed the date of the U-2 incident from April to May of 1960.  Chuck Norton 21:02 CDT June 4, 2011       — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuck Norton (talk • contribs) 02:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Apologizing for JFK

message: "This feeling of inadequacy which pervaded both leaders was one of the key features in their personalities that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis."
Excuse me, but WTF? Can stuff like this (which is all over the article) possibly constitute an objective and scholarly evaluation?
The arrogant tone of this completely unsourced article disturbs me truly. 32.178.178.60 (talk) 02:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Huh?

message: It's a shame that an article on such an important Cold War event is in this bad a shape. I don't know if any editors are monitoring this article for changes but it is in desperate need of help in all aspects: POV, sourcing and raw data. As a semi-professional Cold War historian :) I would be happy to make appropriate revisions using appropriate sources -- Khrushchev's memoirs, Sorenson's JFK books, Dallek and Beschloss come immediately to mind -- and make this article better. Just want to make sure I'm not duplicating someone else's work or interrupting someone else's project first. StephenFHammer (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds to me like you are just the man for the job Stephen.  Nobody has touched the article for months so you are free and clear to go to work on it.  If you would like any assistance with formatting references I will be glad to help.  MarkDask 16:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Major rework needed

message: The article claims that this was the first time the two leaders met. This is not actually true, it was in fact the first time the two men had met as leaders of their respective states. They had previously had a brief meeting in 1959 when Khrushchev visited Washington DC and JFK was still a Senator. I don't know how to incorperate this properly into the article however.
Ref: Khrushchev's Cold War: The Inside Story of An American Adversary by A. Fursenko & T. Naftali p360  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.20.94.218 (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy