Talk:John Kerry/Archive 15

message: I hope nobody minds me changing the Kerry page to a disambig. Not only is having it redirect to John Kerry dubious in terms of need, but changing it removes the need for the Kerry redirects here... notice at the top of the page. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 20:52, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing ''Kerry'' redirect 

message: So is this stuff about VVAW debating (and voting against) the idea of assassinating pro-war senators actually true? Is there any evidence? Is there a reputable source? Evercat 23:04, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: VVAW and assassinations

message: The recent edit histories of George W. Bush and John Kerry have been a slew of petty vandalisms and their reverts. Barring some major unexpected developments that will necessitate serious additions to their respective articles, I suspect that more of the same is about all we can expect over the next few days. I think  temporary vprotected status for both pages to election day might be warrented. Objections, comments? (this same text added at Talk:George W. Bush, Talk:John Kerry, and Wikipedia talk:Protected page). -- Infrogmation 19:34, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have protected both pages.  Please direct discussion to Wikipedia:Protected page where it can be reviewed by people following either page as well as those Wikipedians concerned with page protection in general.  Please note, I have deliberately placed the  at the bottom of the page for cosmetic reasons.  Officially it is supposed to go at the top but that is merely a holdover from the days before a warning appeared when sysops edited a protected page, to be sure that any sysop would be aware of the protection before editing.  No longer justified now that we have the warning.  uc 20:09, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Might this be a good time for short-term protection again? Very few if any substantive changes, very, very much vandalism?  (Apologies if insertion above below comment is not allowed- it seemed irrelevant to, and vice-versa...) Schissel 21:44, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: Err, yes, anonymous poster.  That was exactly the point James was making.  The right-wing site that mentions his example without explaining why he didn't qualify is trying to make it sound like Kerry's getting special treatment, while Cleland, the "more deserving" case doesn't qualify. PaulHammond 04:10, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bush, Kerry: Short term page protection? 

message: Please add:
sl:John F. Kerry --andrejj 05:32, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slovenian interwiki 

message: :Would not John Kerry's resignation from the VVAW six months after his very public testimony in front of the Sentate Foreign Relations Committee and the reasons why not deserve some space (given what seems like disproportionate space to individual medals on the summary page) since Joining the VVAW is there? According to different sources, the reasons for his resignation range from the VVAW having become too radical (violence against public officials raised by some members) to discovering people were not who they represented themselves as being (Kerry and Al Hubbard - then executive director of VVAW - appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" on April 18, 1971 to argue for an end to the war. Shortly thereafter, Hubbard, who had been introduced on the NBC program as a decorated Air Force captain, was exposed for having exaggerated his military credentials. A separate news investigation revealed that there were no military records showing that Hubbard had either served in Vietnam or was injured there) to wanting to run for public office, etc. Those who were fellow VVAW at the time may have some insight as to how they understood the resignation as well as if Kerry himself could clarify the reasons. Some opponents of VVAW feel his resignation validated points they were making all along. I am agnostic as to the merits of any particular detail. Thanks
::We have a summary in this article with a link to a more detailed article.  The discusson in the John Kerry article is:
:::Despite his important role in Operation POW and other VVAW events, as time went on Kerry found that VVAW was becoming more radical. Kerry was trying to moderate the group, to push it in the direction of nonviolence and working within the system. Other members, however, were more militant. Kerry eventually quit the organization over this difference in approach. Some have raised questions about exactly when Kerry left VVAW; see John Kerry VVAW controversy for a full discussion.
::This summary omits the speculation about Hubbard.  From what I remember reading about Kerry and VVAW, I don't think that issue was prominent enough to be worth mentioing here. JamesMLane 02:37, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resignation from Vietnam Veterans Against the War 

message: From the article (emphasis mine):
:Kerry says his first memory is from three... The memorable visit came shortly after the United States had liberated Saint-Briac... on August 14, 1944.
Kerry was 8 months old in August, 1944. Obviously, the author of this sentence meant several years when he or she wrote shortly. For clarity's sake, can we change this to several years? Yes, I'm being pedantic, but this sentence gave me pause when I first read it — all of our articles should flow seamlessly. And there's no good reason to be imprecise. • Benc • 06:58, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Shortly" disambiguation