This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The idea has been introduced (without any discussion here) of moving several sections of this article into a separate article: CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. For the record I am AGAINST this change. Joegoodfriend ( talk) 05:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
This article tends to present the conspiracy theory as fact. Conflicts with facts should be noted, and the article as a whole should avoid such a slant. Nick Heer 01:58, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Nick wants it to be more pro-official theory — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.150.65 ( talk) 16:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
The grammar and spelling need to be corrected throughout the entirety of this page. There are multiple errors, some changing the intended meaning of sentences —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.3.209 ( talk) 12:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Does this follow WP procedure? That is to directly cite the subject matter? It seems like a bit of a confusing paradox to me.-- Senor Freebie ( talk) 08:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
The article has contained the following quote since it was created:
Regarding the sources:
None of these sources attribute the quote to Clark Clifford, nor can I find any reliable sources that do so. Given that [2] does not even mention the quote, [3] in and of itself may be judged unreliable, and [4] is obviously biased in this context, I am going to trim the quote and use the NYT article noted within [3]. Location ( talk) 04:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The material below was removed by BrandonTR with an edit summary stating: "material removed -- WP:FRINGE -- UFO theories are considered fringe and pseudoscience".
Pseudoscience isn't really relevant since the method of cherry-picking FOIA documents and proclaiming "the CIA did it" isn't unique to the author of this particular theory, but it is certainly "fringe" in the world of JFK assassination conspiracy theories. If a WC critic is OK with its removal, then I am, too. Given that it was originally moved from the "Other published theories" section in John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, I'm preserving it here for future reference. Location ( talk) 14:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
- Location ( talk) 19:58, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I am removing the section entitled "Problems with the CIA" per WP:SYNTH: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." It appears as though this section is providing material to substantiate the conspiracy belief that conflicts between the CIA and Kennedy were the impetus for the assassination, and none of the sources for the material make that assertion. The proper way to make this argument is through secondary sources discussing that particular aspect of the conspiracy theory. - Location ( talk) 00:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, the text I've added was not without discussion of the editors. See: Talk:John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories#Second_Oswald_Theory. Thanks. Joegoodfriend ( talk) 20:26, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
This article is hopelessly one sided. It presents virtually no rebuttal to the conspiracy theories and as such violates NPOV, DUE and PROFRINGE. I have tagged it accordingly. These tags should not be removed w/o consensus that these issues have been resolved. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 14:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Location and Ad Orientem: how is:
The secretive nature of the CIA and its reputation for high level political assassinations in the 1960s has made it an "easy target" as the perpetrator for those who believe in a conspiracy.
Actually, I don't think "boogeyman" is a big problem. I mean, it is okay if it remains there in the article. —usernamekiran [talk] 18:22, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
This article is being discussed here:
-- David Tornheim ( talk) 14:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed this section per this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the references cited do not refer to CIA involvement with Cuban exiles in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 15:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed a paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the references cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 15:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed another paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the material and reference cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 00:17, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed a third paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the material and reference cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 20:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed a fourth paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the material and reference cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. Almost all of the information that I have removed from this section is relevant to Assassination attempts on Fidel Castro, but not this one. - Location ( talk) 01:01, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Copied text & references from E. Howard Hunt to CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory See former article's history for list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
"I have always found it significant that Oswald was hired at the Texas School Book Depository shortly before the assassination, and before the parade route was made public."
This might have more to do with his inability to hold a long-term job for much of 1963. Per the Lee Harvey Oswald article:
He was apparently drifting from job to job.
As for John Kennedy, the decision for a presidential visit to Texas was taken on June 5, 1963. The decision was taken in a meeting between Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and John Connally, in part to address political infighting between Democratic politicians in Texas. The visit to Dallas was publicly announced in September, 1963. The motorcade route was finalized on November 18, and it was announced to the public over the four next days. Dimadick ( talk) 01:18, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Hedegaard":
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:47, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
"CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory" is not a neutral title. It tells the reader in advance that whatever follows shouldn't be believed, because it is a 'conspiracy theory', akin to UFOs and whatever is in the Fortean Times. Saying for instance that JFK's head moved back and to the left instead of forward, based on observation of the Zapruder tape, is not a 'conspiracy theory'. Simply put, if JFK was shot from the front or side, Oswald couldn't have shot him from behind. 83.84.100.133 ( talk) 18:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The idea has been introduced (without any discussion here) of moving several sections of this article into a separate article: CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. For the record I am AGAINST this change. Joegoodfriend ( talk) 05:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
This article tends to present the conspiracy theory as fact. Conflicts with facts should be noted, and the article as a whole should avoid such a slant. Nick Heer 01:58, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Nick wants it to be more pro-official theory — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.150.65 ( talk) 16:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
The grammar and spelling need to be corrected throughout the entirety of this page. There are multiple errors, some changing the intended meaning of sentences —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.3.209 ( talk) 12:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Does this follow WP procedure? That is to directly cite the subject matter? It seems like a bit of a confusing paradox to me.-- Senor Freebie ( talk) 08:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
The article has contained the following quote since it was created:
Regarding the sources:
None of these sources attribute the quote to Clark Clifford, nor can I find any reliable sources that do so. Given that [2] does not even mention the quote, [3] in and of itself may be judged unreliable, and [4] is obviously biased in this context, I am going to trim the quote and use the NYT article noted within [3]. Location ( talk) 04:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The material below was removed by BrandonTR with an edit summary stating: "material removed -- WP:FRINGE -- UFO theories are considered fringe and pseudoscience".
Pseudoscience isn't really relevant since the method of cherry-picking FOIA documents and proclaiming "the CIA did it" isn't unique to the author of this particular theory, but it is certainly "fringe" in the world of JFK assassination conspiracy theories. If a WC critic is OK with its removal, then I am, too. Given that it was originally moved from the "Other published theories" section in John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, I'm preserving it here for future reference. Location ( talk) 14:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
- Location ( talk) 19:58, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I am removing the section entitled "Problems with the CIA" per WP:SYNTH: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." It appears as though this section is providing material to substantiate the conspiracy belief that conflicts between the CIA and Kennedy were the impetus for the assassination, and none of the sources for the material make that assertion. The proper way to make this argument is through secondary sources discussing that particular aspect of the conspiracy theory. - Location ( talk) 00:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, the text I've added was not without discussion of the editors. See: Talk:John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories#Second_Oswald_Theory. Thanks. Joegoodfriend ( talk) 20:26, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
This article is hopelessly one sided. It presents virtually no rebuttal to the conspiracy theories and as such violates NPOV, DUE and PROFRINGE. I have tagged it accordingly. These tags should not be removed w/o consensus that these issues have been resolved. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 14:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Location and Ad Orientem: how is:
The secretive nature of the CIA and its reputation for high level political assassinations in the 1960s has made it an "easy target" as the perpetrator for those who believe in a conspiracy.
Actually, I don't think "boogeyman" is a big problem. I mean, it is okay if it remains there in the article. —usernamekiran [talk] 18:22, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
This article is being discussed here:
-- David Tornheim ( talk) 14:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed this section per this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the references cited do not refer to CIA involvement with Cuban exiles in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 15:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed a paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the references cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 15:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed another paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the material and reference cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 00:17, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed a third paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the material and reference cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. - Location ( talk) 20:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I have removed a fourth paragraph from this section with this edit. This article is supposed to be about Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories involving the CIA, and the material and reference cited in this paragraph do not refer to CIA involvement with the mafia in the assassination of Kennedy. Almost all of the information that I have removed from this section is relevant to Assassination attempts on Fidel Castro, but not this one. - Location ( talk) 01:01, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Copied text & references from E. Howard Hunt to CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory See former article's history for list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
"I have always found it significant that Oswald was hired at the Texas School Book Depository shortly before the assassination, and before the parade route was made public."
This might have more to do with his inability to hold a long-term job for much of 1963. Per the Lee Harvey Oswald article:
He was apparently drifting from job to job.
As for John Kennedy, the decision for a presidential visit to Texas was taken on June 5, 1963. The decision was taken in a meeting between Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and John Connally, in part to address political infighting between Democratic politicians in Texas. The visit to Dallas was publicly announced in September, 1963. The motorcade route was finalized on November 18, and it was announced to the public over the four next days. Dimadick ( talk) 01:18, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Hedegaard":
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:47, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
"CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory" is not a neutral title. It tells the reader in advance that whatever follows shouldn't be believed, because it is a 'conspiracy theory', akin to UFOs and whatever is in the Fortean Times. Saying for instance that JFK's head moved back and to the left instead of forward, based on observation of the Zapruder tape, is not a 'conspiracy theory'. Simply put, if JFK was shot from the front or side, Oswald couldn't have shot him from behind. 83.84.100.133 ( talk) 18:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)