Talk:Jesse Macbeth

message: Should the lede suggest that the video is a likely hoax? I am considering putting something to that effect in there. The intro gives DOB information, like he's a real person, but where did we get that information? Are we sure this is the same guy, or just someone's name that they picked for the video? If someone was getting the "executive summary" of Jesse Macbeth from this article and just read the intro paragraph, they might still think it's real. -- Yekrats 09:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the lede suggest that the video is a hoax? 

message: Im not sure if this counts as a notable news report or anything, but this article has been linked to from [The Religion of Peace.com. Now I don't know if that warrents one of those "In the News" banners or not since its hardly a mainstream source of news, but I just thought i'd mention. Homestarmy 21:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the News 

message: What is the official army term for "boot camp washout"? We should use that term. -- Yekrats 00:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official term are in Block 19 "Service Member has not completed first full term of service", Block 24, "Uncharacterized" and Block 28 "Entry level performance and conduct".  Another point in the DD-214 is that in Block 25 says "he was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200 Chapter 11.  That means he was found to be unfit to remain in the Army and was dicharged for the good of the service."  Which you can find it here http://dont.stanford.edu/regulations/regulation27.pdf  ViriiK 01:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Boot camp washout" 

message: Everyone, I hope this is OK. I just removed the  tag. The article is MUCH better.
I do have this caveat: I think the sections about socialistalternative.org and Eastern Arizona Courier are really weak, but their refering articles do not exist any more. They also do not exist in http://archive.org (they both blocked the archive.org robot.) I'm not sure what to do about this. Did a blog grab "before and after" pictures of this? If so, we can compare them. Otherwise, maybe we can lump these sections together, because what we are saying here is, "Look at the evidence in this link which does not exist any more!"
Also, a writer put in "footnotey" stuff in the main body of the article. Usually the "this guy said this at this time in this publication and then again on this date" might be tucked away in the footnotes, IMO. I've cleaned up a couple of those, to tighten up the piece.
Finally, I'd like to thank everyone for working with me on this, and I apologize for coming on so strongly at the beginning. In the end, though, I think we came up with a much better article. Thanks for setting aside your annoyance of me to work constructively on the article! :-) -- Yekrats 10:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, I appreciate your help, too. The EA Courier story should still be available - it just costs $5 to check the story (hence, subscription required is noted in the ciatation). A  copy of the EA courier article is appended at the end of the Arizona Indymedia article from April 2004, so you can read it there. A copy of the SocialistAlternative.org interview is appended in its entirety to the May 27 DailyKos post by Sharon Jumper, linked from "external links." Bugmuncher 17:09, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks 

message: When I did my massive rewrite, I removed much of the well-thought (but now redundant) criticisms of Macbeth's uniform. Here's the most recent copy of that section, attached below. Bugmuncher 17:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Macbeth's Uniform

message: *Automatic failure of requirement #5 of WP:WIAGA due to the  tag. 
*Also, "This file is in the public domain, because PepperSpray Productions did not protect its work with copyright." is NOT a valid reason. All work are automatically copywriten under U.S. law even if the person doesn't not specificially state so. Unless you can get a quote that he's released the images into public domain, those images are unfree.--SeizureDog 14:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your review. The video says "copy Left 3/06" at the end of it... would that be a suitable release into public domain? Also, just because the information "could" change rapidy, as the  tag indicates, doesn't mean it does change rapidy. There haven't been major changes to the article for about a week... Bugmuncher 04:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I have no idea exactly what "copy Left" would mean. Since the "Left" is capitalized, it might mean that it's saying that it's copyrighed to someone name Left or a group that calls themselves Left. I've know I've never seen anyone use the term in any sense such as releasing copyrights though. --SeizureDog 05:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Negative. Copyleft is a copyright liscense that provides the content liscensed as public domain, so long as any work derived from it is also released under the Copyleft liscense. It is very similar to the GPL, except that it can apply to anything, not just source code. I'm going to update the pertinent images used in the article. EvilCouch 09:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *"A week" isn't a long enough period of time. The point of the stable requirement is to make sure that in say, a year's time you can come back to the article and it would be as relatively complete as it was before. If you feel that the article no longer is a current event that is rapidly changing, then you should remove the tag. As long as you feel like next week he could do another dumbass thing that warrents updating the article though, then wait a while before nominating for GA. I suggest waiting a month from the last time you see his name mentioned.--SeizureDog 05:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Failure

message: should anyone realy mention myspace on wikipedia for any real reason  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.61.81 (talk) 23:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is myspace important at all 

message: Information on new statements by Macbeth was recently deleted because such statements were made in an online forum. I can't help noting that pretty much everything Macbeth has done has been online.
Furthermore, the administration of the site in question has given public confirmation that both the registration email of the user's account and his IP information are consistent with his claimed identity. This is considerably better identity verification than has been offered for the Myspace and Military.com accounts where Macbeth is alleged to have made claims.
I have no quarrel with whatever standard we choose to follow, but consistency in those standards would seem to be in our best interest.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.214.76 (talk) 02:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Forum Entries versus other online activity

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Jesse Macbeth. 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/20060524171113/http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article13.php?id=261 to http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article13.php?id=261
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140813110951/http://qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=3957 to http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=3957
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060524171113/http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article13.php?id=261 to http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article13.php?id=261
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) 22:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified