Talk:John Roselli

message: Why are there two John Roselli articles? There's John Roselli and Johnny Rosselli.— Preceding unsigned comment added by  67.174.30.26  (talk • contribs)  01:59, 16 February 2006‎ (UTC)
The info on Eagle Lion is all wrong. It was backed by billionaire Robert R Young and run by Arthur Krim, later the head of United Artists. Rosselli didn't get hired until after he got out of prison for extorting the studios. You have it in reverse order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.195.97 (talk) 07:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two articles 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
;What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:John and Frank.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Roselli was hired on Nixon's orders with Trafficante and Giancanna to work with the CIA to kill Castro.  They developed close personal relationships with their CIA contacts, and they are all connected through the Kennedy Coup.  The three men were bosses with high positions in the mob.  Though I don't doubt Roselli's involvement with the killing, I doubt he was a trigger man.  James Files, who was also mentioned, said Charles Nicoletti was his fellow gunman on the ground in his confession interview. The events of the Mafia-CIA plots, the JFK killing, and Watergate all tie together. Check out Russ Baker's book on the Bush family and Lamar Waldron's book on Watergate.  They connect the characters and the dots.  From my research I strongly believe Nixon did not order the Watergate break-ins, and it was a set up to smear him relentlessly. Russ Baker comes to this conclusion, but Waldron believes he or his advisors ordered it because they believed the Democrats had the classified documents of CIA-Mafia plots and Castro assassination documents signed by Nixon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.111.53.242 (talk) 02:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The conspiracy theories likely stem from what Roselli's attorney later said he said. -Location (talk) 01:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  JFK section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Roselli. 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/20120609031601/http://www.playboy.com/playground/newsroom/politics/how-the-outfit-killed-jfk to http://www.playboy.com/playground/newsroom/politics/how-the-outfit-killed-jfk
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) 20:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: From the article:
'Tony Accardo told Roselli to force powerful Columbia Pictures president Harry Cohn into signing then-unknown actress Marilyn Monroe to a lucrative multi-year contract. The usually combative Cohn quickly complied without opposition, mainly because Cohn had obtained control of Columbia through mob funds and influence provided by both Accardo and Roselli.[citation needed]'
Okay, I think that 'citation needed' is one way to put it, but this is indeed a bunch of nonsense. I'm fairly deeply immersed in this Hollywood history, Marilyn Monroe and Cohn and such, but let's just restrict ourselves to the point that there was no 'lucrative multi-year contract', because Marilyn Monroe's contract was for six months. It wasn't 'lucrative' at all, and rather than saying how much it was for, I will just point out that saying it was 'lucrative' means nothing. And of course, we might simply reflect here on what possible written memorandum or personal testimony there could even be, to confirm  these sorts of assertions about what Tony Accardo told Roselli and such. While we are at it, it's simply outrageous to pass along this notion that Cohn had obtained control of Columbia through mob funds and influence etc. Harry Cohn was the co-founder. Wiki will tell you this. Start over, here, this entire quote is bogus, and while I'm at it I do not vouch for the rest of the article.DanLanglois (talk) 10:07, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: So then why didn't you just remove it? Removed. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 00:01, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  This stuff is ludicrous 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Roselli. 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/20141011171147/http://reviews.publishersweekly.com/978-0-312-20388-7 to http://reviews.publishersweekly.com/978-0-312-20388-7
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) 14:13, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified