Talk:Kermit Roosevelt Jr.

message: The information below has nothing to do with Kermit Roosevelt.
:
Therefore I've removed it.
If anyone has any citations linking Roosevelt to the supposed Oil related motivation of the coup, please feel free to post this back up. Or it could be incorporated into the existing TPAJAX article. Matt
:[Also] Somebody accidently put up this:
:...[w]hich is simply repeating what is stated (and cited - please cite the claims you make) above. If this information is important, please add it to the AJAX section as it is clearly a summary of TPAJAX.
:Thanks, Matt  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.152.16.27 (talk) 08:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of irrelevant material

message: Isn't this guy notable for anything in his long life other than the coup that put the Shah back on the throne? Thats how the lead sentence and almost the entire article is taken up with it. Certainly it was important, but is that the only thing about him worthy of mention?--Dudeman5685 (talk) 01:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Information 

message: John Perkins calls Kermit Roosevelt the first economic hitman in his book confessions of an economic hitman.  I feel like that should be mentioned somewhere.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.207.106.181 (talk) 22:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Economic Hitman 

message: I know Wiki articles should be taken with a grain of salt, but this... really? 
We have these things called "Editors"; check them out.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.108.232 (talk) 11:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this a JOKE??   

message: As it stands, this content is mistitled. This article is most substantially an article about Operation Ajax.
Because of this misguided, redundant presentation of that other article's focused material, again here, this article fails to provide readers with an adequate picture of the title subject—who he was, his life, training, public service, etc., as a notable historic, public figure. Simply put, the article fails as encyclopedic content.
As such, three tags were placed, 
* one to state that the lead (which focuses on Ajax to the exclusion of all else) does not reflect whole of the man's life, even to the poor extent the current article captures it (e.g., no mention of involvement in the debate on the partition of Palestine which is briefly covered in the article),  
* one to state that the article focuses, in essay fashion, on single event rather than whole of man's life, and 
* a third, to say that the presentation of that single event, which should only appear in limited fashion here, from choice of its sources to its presentation, is not neutral in WP:POV.
Please feel free to discuss, but it appears that these issues are longstanding, and by tagging them, perhaps we can bring in newly interested editors, and so move the article toward being encyclopedic, and so a good WP article.  Le Prof  71.201.62.200 (talk) 04:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Article tagged for persisting POV and emphasis issue

message: First, in the section on Roosevelt writings, I replaced a URL-only source with the complete citation, including a link to a reliable reprint of the actual Pamphlet. Note, I removed the description of the pamphlet as "an anti-Zionist pamphlet" because this is an opinion/analysis that is WP:OR coming from an editor, and needs a source for such a description to appear in the encyclopedia.
Second, in the "Early career" section, a quote regarding the IAAA pamphlet attributed to Roosevelt was simply in error. The quote that appeared was not from Roosevelt (as indicated), nor in the source indicated, but was rather a statement appearing at the archive site of the Roosevelt pamphlet, and made by anon. archive.org archivist. Moreover, there is no Foreign Affairs article as suggested—based on searching, it appears Roosevelt never published in this periodical, and the quoted text does not appear in that periodical either. Hence, THE EARLIER APPEARING JOURNAL WAS INACCURATE AS A STATED SOURCE, AND THE ROOSEVELT LINK WAS NOT THE SOURCE OF THE INFORMATION APPEARING (QUOTED OR OTHERWISE). Simply put, the sentence as a whole had no basis that could be found, in the earlier cited link/source, or otherwise. It was replaced by similar descriptive text that is now accurate to the sources.  Le Prof  71.201.62.200 (talk) 15:48, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most recent edits 

message: First, note, that labeling a subsection based on its principle sourcing is non-standard and unacceptable; I was the one who did this, and expect its being edited out when the reality changes—when the section is newly sourced by an array of reliable, balanced or otherwise unbiased sources. Until the sourcing and balance are in line with wikipedia policy, I ask that this heading remain. (When it is not exclusively a "democracynow.com" perspective, change the subsection title, by all means.)
Second, I am changing the "too close to source tag" on this subsection, to a POV tag. I understand that the POV tag will draw editorial scrutiny to the section, and this is precisely what is needed. Cheers. Le Prof.  71.201.62.200 (talk) 14:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the section from democracynow.com. No reason to have an entire section dedicated to this non-expert source. --Jprg1966 (talk) 20:43, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: The "democracynow.com" subsection: Changing tags to get editorial attention

message: Both the infobox and the "personal" section refer to a "Kermit III".  The later *refers* to a Kermit Roosevelt III, born April 7, 1938. The former *links* to a Kermit III who is this Kermit, Jr.'s grandson, although according to his CV (at https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/krooseve/cv.pdf ), he does self-identify as a "III" — but he was born July 14, 1971, and so is clearly the grandson of this Kermit, Jr., and is specified as so on the Kermit Roosevelt  disambiguation page.  A little disambiguation might help?  Was the first III actually a II, or have there really been two IIIs? MrRedwood (talk) 08:49, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been two IIIs. The Roosevelt's generally followed the convention that when Sr. dies, everyone else bumps up one. Rklawton (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kermit III vs Kermit III? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kermit Roosevelt Jr.. 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/20090226150246/http://www.counterpunch.org/sasan08192003.html to http://www.counterpunch.org/sasan08192003.html
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) 18:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: *http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/20/64-years-later-cia-finally-releases-details-of-iranian-coup-iran-tehran-oil/ --87.159.113.90 (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 2017 Released Details of Iranian Coup from the CIA 

message: This article should surely be an NPOV account of Kermit Roosevelt's efforts to advance US interests. And yet its replete with statements such as ...
:After the war, Roosevelt went on to serve on the advisory board of the largely Arab organization, The Institute of Arab American Affairs (IAAA, 1944-1950)
What's that mean? Arab Americans were not putting the interests of the US first? If Kermit had been a patriotic American he'd not have been involved with "Arab Americans"?
:In February 1948 Roosevelt joined other like-minded individuals—more than 100 individuals—to form a "Christian group" to aid the fight of the largely rabbinical American Council for Judaism to reverse the ongoing partition of Palestine into exclusive, separate Jewish and Arab states
What's that mean? American Jews and Christians had no business protesting what was rapidly becoming the eviction of 5/6ths of all the Christians of Israel?
:the American Friends of the Middle East (AFME), a pro-Arabist organization often critical of U.S. support for Israel.[8][9]
What's that mean? Americans familiar with the ME were (and presumably are) not entitled to criticise US support for Israel?
:Historians Robert Moats Miller, Hugh Wilford, and others have stated that from its early years, AFME was a part of an Arabist propaganda effort within the U.S. "secretly funded and to some extent managed" by the CIA,[8][9] with further funding from the oil consortium, ARAMCO.[9]
What's that mean? The CIA and ARAMCO were anti-American engaged in Arabist propaganda, sabotaging US interests in the region? 86.140.150.40 (talk) 18:40, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kermit's links with Arabs made to sound un-patriotic 

message: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch#Contentious labels warns that terrorism is loaded language and should not be used unless explicitly described as such by reliable sources.  has asserted that Roosevelt's time in the CIA was a "terrorism career" by the literal definition of terrorism, and that Wikipedia is doing its readers a disservice not describing his participation in Operation Ajax and fomenting other CIA-sponsored coups as terrorism.
This has apparently been implicit consensus by silence as the section title §Cold War and CIA Terrorism and its seven mentions of "terrorism" have survived for over a month, although it was removed from the lead sentence. It is possible for a local consensus of editors to ignore the suggestions of the Manual of Style, or that editors with access to sources can find his actions being described as such.
Should the "terrorism" wording stay or be removed? 93 (talk) 05:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we need to have a lengthy discussion before rolling back the changes made by our IP friend from Sheffield. The cited sources don't call Kermit a terrorist at all, and they don't pin acts of terrorism on him. This is a simple case of failed verification. Binksternet (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Terrorism" wording