Talk:Charlie Wilson (Texas politician)

message: The wording there was odd, so I took out the references to diesel and nuclear submarines. If someone wants to restore them, they should explain when he stopped chasing diesel subs and started going after nuclear ones- did he change ships, was his ship reassigned, did the Russians phase out diesel subs, etc. Stilgar135 22:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After speaking informally with quite a few Russians, I believe the families of slain and wounded Soviet conscripts blown to bits with Stinger missiles that he funded would disagree with your "may he rest in peace" assessment.  To this day they're...not too happy with his most famous of Congressional appropriations activities.  With all due respect, that had to be said.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.145.236.185 (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Them's the breaks when you invade a country, massacre its citizens, and act like barbarians to the women of the country.  Are we supposed to feel sympathy with invaders that had no purpose other than to occupy and suppress a whole nation?  Have you spoken "informally" to the parents of murdered or maimed Afghani kids who were devastated by these Soviet conscripts? Anyway, Wiki's not a forum (yeah, I'm a hypocrite here) and you'd need to cite some reliable secondary sources to make your point. HammerFilmFan (talk) 00:21, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chasing Russian submarines 

message: I am the only one who finds the following assertion ridiculous: "Without Charlie Wilson, Communist Russia would have most likely crushed the Afghan resistance. Although most people are not aware of it, Charlie Wilson, with the help of many others, helped bring down the communist government by supplying millions of dollars to the Afghan Mujahideen to beat the soviets in Afghanistan". --Ghirla -трёп- 09:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unencyclopedic speculations 

message: This article is way too patriotic.  It needs to be revised to reflect a more neutral stance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.196.181.132 (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While you are right about WP not being a forum on Wilson/America, it is our policy not to delete forum posts.Drewson99 (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is true, generally speaking. However, per Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Others.27_comments: Editing others' comments is sometimes allowed, but you should exercise caution in doing so. Some examples of appropriately editing others' comments: . . . Deleting material not relevant to improving the article (per the above subsection Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#How to use article talk pages). . . . --Evb-wiki (talk) 16:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

text: This userbox says it all:  Sf46 (talk) 03:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too patriotic 

message: I feel this page would be a lot more complete with a section  concerning Wilson's support of the Somoza regime of Nicaragua in the late 1970s, fighting to increase American military aid to Nicaragua, in spite of the fact that the Somoza's were notorious human rights violators.  However, it's an area I'm rather ignorant in, and I really only have one source (Cynthia J. Arnson, 'Crossroads: Congress, The President, and Central America, 1976-1993.' Pantheon Books: 1993).  Any opinions on whether this subject should be added?  (134.153.101.102 06:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can provide coverage of the support in a balanced way, then go ahead. 1ne 23:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Somoza Support 

message: I removed the line stating that Wilson staffed his Congressional Office with tall, attractive women as there is no citation for this employment pattern.--Mhundley1962 20:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entry into Politics 

message: The article states: "some now credit it with being a contributing factor to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union".  This reference to the speculations of unknown individuals should require references.  Who gives it credit? How was it a contributing factor?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.82.171.153 (talk) 06:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References needed 

message: Currently, the article on this Charles "Charlie" Wilson is disambiguated as Charles Wilson (politician).  However, there's another "Charlie Wilson" politician, disambiguated as Charlie Wilson (Ohio politician).  Additionally, there exist:  Charles Wilson (Canadian politician), Charles Wilson (New Zealand) (also a politician).  It would seem to me that this article should be moved to Charles Wilson (Texas politician), to disambiguate him from the other Charles/Charlie Wilson politicians. ENeville 22:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The new film might make this Charles Wilson the most notable of the politicians, but if the page is moved it should probably be "Texan politician" rather than "Texas politician". —MJBurrage • TALK • 04:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, with states as a modifier for a noun, the state name is used, not the residential form. For the other Charlie Wilson, we don't say "Ohioan politician"; nor would we say "New Yorker politician" and so forth. "Texas politician" is correct. Softlavender (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The renaming was probably a good idea, but I think it would have been better if the person who did the rename had followed up by changing all of the links. I've changed a couple, but there are probably many more that need to be fixed. Must admit that I don't really feel motivated to do this myself right now. Maybe later... --RenniePet (talk) 13:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation (modifier) move 

message: Is there a way to include Congressman Wilson's membership in Congressional Committees and Subcommittees? Thanks, (74.134.124.3 (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congressional Committees 

message: Was there actually a Texas married woman like the one portrayed in the movie? If so, I'd like to know more about her. Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.3.187 (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the History Channel documentary (and a Wikipedia article), Joanne Herring was an actual person.  She appeared in the interviews.  Her marital status may be a different matter. Sf46 (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the book Charlie Wilson's war, she is a widow, and her and Wilson apparently had a romantic relationship with a lot more depth than depicted in the film. Tsaraleksi (talk) 13:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The woman was also interviewed as part of the bonus material on the DVD. ThetaSax (talk) 10:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The woman in the background portrayed by Julia Roberts??? 

message: Just a note, this: "For the next 12 years, Wilson made his reputation in the Texas legislature as the "liberal from Lufkin", viewed with suspicion by business interests. He battled for the regulation of utilities, fought for Medicaid, tax exemptions for the elderly, the Equal Rights Amendment, and a minimum wage bill," is copied directly from Crile's book on Wilson.  I'm not sure what the policies on that kind of thing are, so I'll not change it, but I figured it's important enough to note.   
Tsaraleksi (talk) 23:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagarism 

message: The #2 footnote links to an Annapolis Capital article on Charlie Wilson about the time the film premeired. The reference to Wilson having the second most demerits in Academy history is based on a joke he told. This reference is not accurate. Besides, if a Midshipman accumulates 300 demerits, they are seperated, so it is not a running contest. Sharrw (talk) 21:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  USNA Reference 

message: Just a suggestion: Since two Wilsons (Charlie and Ed) appear in the paragraph about Somoza, it might be good to clarify which of them had the girlfriend fondled  by Somoza.Beachdogz (talk) 06:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Wilson's girlfriend did Somoza hit on? 

message: We are working on a class project for a Public History course at Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, TX in conjunction with the Charlie Wilson Oral History Project. Editors have taken down our edits about Wilson's drug/alcohol use as well as his retirement. Please stop deleting our edits. All facts are from credible sources and we do not understand why our edits continue to be deleted. Although you should not delete our edits, because they are completely factual and have references, if you must delete our edits I ask that you please wait until Tuesday because the project is due Monday. Thank you.
I would also like to know why our edits are being deleted. What criticisms do you have that justify you to delete our edits? Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcadamsjr (talk • contribs) 19:51, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are you deleting our revisions? 

message: An image used in this article, File:Wilson Posing With Gun.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:Wilson Posing With Gun.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion 

message: Article states Wilson got the most demerits in the history of Annapolis. In the movie, Hanks, as Wilson, says he got the second most, in response to which the young lady asks, "Who got the most? I wanna sleep with him."
Thus, which one is correct? Did the writers of the movie change it so they could get her line in there?
--Mfwills (talk) 23:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many demerits? 

message: "As for domestic policy, Wilson ceaselessly championed for the individual's rights, especially women and minority rights. He continuously voted pro-choice and fought voting discrimination against African Americans, two of his largest constituent bases. Wilson respected his district's female vote so much that in 1974 he used the League of Women Voters to pass the Safe Drinking Water Act.[14] In addition to supporting women's rights legislation, Wilson broke Washington tradition and hired female staffers. Although Wilson never had a female chief of staff, his office was filled with gorgeous women who tirelessly helped the congressman. "Charlie's Angels," as they were commonly referred to, handled constituent problems for Wilson to ensure none of his constituents lacked in aid and support. All of Wilson's "Angels" were brilliant and were dedicated in their service for the congressman.[15] Wilson's staff quickly drew the attention of his colleagues and media. Although rumors of scandals surrounded Wilson's office, Wilson emphatically insisted that his staff should be respected and their diligent work for the representative enabled them to have freedom to work independently of Wilson.[15]
Wilson worked on improving Americans' lives, especially those of the underprivileged. Wilson lobbied against business interests to maintain a $3.35 per hour minimum wage.[16] Wilson also continuously sought to increase Medicare and Medicaid funding for the elderly and underprivileged and Veterans' Affairs funding for veterans. His efforts in these regards gained him the reputation of “taking care of the home folks” and gained funding to open the Veterans Affairs Hospital in Lufkin, Texas.[17]
Wilson avidly supported the Second Amendment and the individual's rights to own firearms. His Second Amendment support created tension between Wilson and his sister Sharon Allison, but the siblings reached an agreement that Allison would leave Wilson alone about his second amendment support, and Wilson would support Allison's pro-choice agenda.[18]"
There is some clear bias in this article. There is also some revisionist history regarding his scandalous history. Somebody must work to change this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.6.0.163 (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias towards Wilson in this Article 

message: This article has been tagged for excessive use of external links since February of 2010, very justifiably so. I pruned them back to just include the Congressional links, the IMDB information about the movie, and the link to his congressional papers collection (although I was hesitant about leaving that one, even; much of the information is not available except to researchers).
The remaining links mostly fell into several categories: a) interviews with Wilson, b) information about the movie Charlie Wilson's War, c) obituaries of Wilson from various and sundry, and d) biographical articles written about Wilson, with the bulk of them being obits. I think at most there should be one link from each of those categories, and would argue that they could all probably go.
The links removed were:
* Charlie Wilson biography at biography.com (accessed 2007-12-23).
* Conversation with Charlie Wilson on The Charlie Rose Show
* News, photos and a blog about Charlie Wilson and the movie from Charlie Wilson's hometown newspaper, The Lufkin Daily News.
* "Charlie Wilson's War Was Really America's War," article by former White House speechwriter Michael Johns on Charlie Wilson, January 19, 2008.
* "Afghanistan's New Militant Alliances," BBC article on Afghan military history referencing Wilson's involvement, April 17, 2006.
* "Charlie Did It," by Paul Wolf, June 7, 2003.
* Movie
* Looking Back: An Interview with Charlie Wilson Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 2008 interview
* Obituaries in Aljazeera, Austin American-Statesman, Dawn (Pakistan), Financial Times, Lufkin Daily News, Houston Chronicle, The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post
* Charlie Wilson - Daily Telegraph obituary
* Wallach, Dan. "Charlie Wilson 'loved East Texas first'". (February 10, 2010) The Beaumont Enterprise. Retrieved February 11, 2010.
* Leopold, Todd. "Former congressman Charlie Wilson dead at 76". (February 11, 2010) CNN. Retrieved February 11, 2010.
* Arnold, Laurence; Greiff, James; Henry, David. "Charlie Wilson, Congressman Who Armed Afghan Rebels, Dies at 76". (February 10, 2010) BusinessWeek". Retrieved February 11, 2010.
*  Biography
*  Biography at Texas State Handbook Online
The cleanup tag I added, meanwhile, was because large portions of this article are written in a puffery-biographical style, rather than an encyclopediac style, particularly in the "Congressional Politics" section. As written, that section is a hagiography, not an encyclopedia article. The beginning of the "Good Time Charlie" section is encyclopediac, but the tone shifts at "Wilson was also a lifelong rogue..." and likewise slips into puffery. 
--rahaeli (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links sharply pruned back + cleanup tag added 

message: I read Wikipedia a lot, but I have only a vague understanding of all it's policies. I was reading this article after it was submitted to Reddit, and the lines "Although Wilson never had a female chief of staff, his office was filled with gorgeous women who tirelessly helped the congressman. "Charlie's Angels," as they were commonly referred to, handled constituent problems for Wilson to ensure none of his constituents lacked in aid and support. All of Wilson's "Angels" were brilliant and were dedicated in their service for the congressman." feel a little...off to me.
The article claims that Wilson's office was 'filled' with gorgeous women (a subjective statement) who tirelessly helped him. Then claims that they were all brilliant. That just...seems to be a bit much. Like the article is trying to sell Charlie Wilson to me. Sorry if it's a non-problem.
50.142.220.252 (talk) 15:49, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article point of view possibly biased? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Charlie Wilson (Texas politician). 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/web/*/http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/region/ETtoday/cww/stories/book_signing.html to http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/region/ETtoday/cww/stories/book_signing.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 00:56, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Charlie Wilson (Texas politician). 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/19700101000000/http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/region/ETtoday/cww/stories/book_signing.html to http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/region/ETtoday/cww/stories/book_signing.html
*Added  tag to http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-people-and-stories/tom-hanks--charlie-wilsons-war/article50630-3.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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: From the article: 'Wilson's drunkenness also led to a scandal in 1980 when an eyewitness reported that Wilson's Lincoln Continental hit a Mazda in a hit-and-run accident on the Key Bridge in Washington, D.C., the night before his first trip to Pakistan. Although he was never convicted, this accident illustrates Wilson's recklessness with alcohol.'
Well, but here, we’re left with the question of why Wilson was never prosecuted given the presence of eyewitnesses who identified his car as the offending vehicle. Technically, the claim isn't being made here that he was indicted. Nor is this claim made in the reference. I gather that  Wilson was driving drunk. And, crashed his Lincoln Continental. And, sped off into the night. And was inebriated. I gather something of his reckless irresponsibility. But I hesitate over the statement that he was 'never convicted' of something for which he was never indicted. I could change this word 'convicted' to 'indicted', and also, the reference given here has Wilson recounting that he “barely” got out of a DUI, but that was in Texas. Wilson was arrested for driving under the influence in 1969. And actually, where do we get 'a scandal in 1980', here? The Washington Post has this on August 13, 1983 with the title: 'Congressman's Car Involved in Hit-Run Crash':
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1983/08/13/congressmans-car-involved-in-hit-run-crash/afb85df7-474b-4766-9710-952e79424c6d/
DanLanglois (talk) 08:45, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  hit and run accident 'never convicted'? 

message: There's an entire paragraph about how 13 year-old Charlie Wilson's dog was brutally murdered by evil politician Charles Hazard, so underage Charlie drove black people to the polls to defeat that politician. The only source for this dramatic story was Charlie Wilson quotes from Crile's fluff-book, Charlie Wilson's War. This paragraph should be removed unless a second source can be found to verify any of it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.55.12 (talk) 02:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles Hazard Dog Murder Story 

message: The widow of the Congressman is worthy of mention, and so has been re-inserted.  It is improper to remove this.  BlauGraf (talk) 12:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This article isn't about Charlie Wilson's widow. It makes no difference at all to Charlie Wilson's life or legacy if she remarried after he died. Mo Billings (talk) 15:40, 22 March 
2021 (UTC)
The fact that she is his wife deserves mention.  It is one line, and there is no reason for deleting it.  Please stop. BlauGraf (talk) 12:46, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

text: Per WP:ONUS,   has very patiently explained why this content does not belong here, and on your talk page  clearly stated why Wilson's widow's current husband is not notable per WP:GNG and WP:NBIO . Please respect the bold-revert-discuss process, do the work of actually reading the policies and guidelines which other editors hyperlink when discussing with you, and refrain from edit warring anywhere on Wikipedia. Generalrelative (talk) 17:33, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

text: Are you accusing me of edit warring on a page which I have only edited once? That's not what the term means, per WP:EW. And as both  and  have explained to you  , you are not being harassed. I am watching your edits because of  (an acceptable use of contribution history per WP:HOUNDING), and frankly I am increasingly concerned about a persistent pattern of disruption and WP:IDHT behavior. Please take a step back and reflect on what others are saying to you (including actually reading the policy links we leave for you), rather than continually reacting with anger when things don't go your way. Generalrelative (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

text: It's clearly inappropriate under WP:BLP to discuss post death personal details about his non-notable wife on this article, especially not when relying on primary sources. Even details about his wife when he was alive need to be limited to those necessary to an understanding of Charlie Wilson, which is what this article is about. If her current husband is WP:notable, it may be okay to mention her name in the article on him, especially if secondary sources are available which mention her. Under rare circumstances it may even be okay to mention her previous marriage to Charlie Wilson. But that seems to be a big "if". Despite the WP:red link, I see no reason to think he is notable. If there's any doubt about this which isn't satisfied by this discussion and a reading of the policy, feel free to ask at WP:BLP/N. Also WP:Consensus is explicitly not a majority view, and we never vote to assess consensus. I suggest anyone confused check out our relevant policies and guidelines like the earlier one and WP:RfC to learn why such processes are explicitly not votes. Nil Einne (talk) 04:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

text: Yes, it is a marketing slogan. Red Bull doesn't actually give you wings either. A more honest description would say that "anyone capable of understanding the purpose of an encyclopaedia can contribute, provided they do so in accordance with the way policies and guidelines suggest, and provided they are willing to do so in a spirit of cooperative endeavour". AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wife