This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Paul Whelan (security director) 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 |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've used the Daily Mail to support some bio details because they currently have the most indepth coverage. They cite public records and I have no reason to doubt the info, but as better sources become available they should be substituted. Legacypac ( talk) 19:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
The subject was born in Canada = Canadian. His parents were UK citizens so he was also born UK. He was raised in the US which suggests the family immigrated when he was a child. No surprise he is an American. For a British person to get an Irish passport is easy. I'm failing to see what the competition is or why we should mention it. Legacypac ( talk) 20:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
He has multiple citizenships because of his birth situation and family move to the US. The passports are only a matter of filling out applications. It is not like baseball card collecting. We should definitely include his citizenships. Legacypac ( talk) 20:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Canada citizenship because born in Canada US citizenship likely because the family moved there UK parents gave him UK citizenship at birth Not totally clear where the Irish citizenship came from but it was not via marriage (never married) and nothing suggests he lived there so it most likely is by decent from a parent or grandparent (see Irish nationality law). Therefore he was likely entitled to the Irish passport from birth. No evidence on how he got US citizenship (immigration or because a parent held it) but the other three are either definately or nearly definately gained at birth. Legacypac ( talk) 09:12, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
It is not "trouble" if you travel a lot - it is required. Generally any citizen of any country is expected/required to enter that country using a passport issued by that country. If he shows up at the Canadian border and presents an American passport he is committing an offence or at least could be denied admission. Also visa requirements differ by passport. Gaining visa free access to just one other country with passport B not offered by passport A can pay for the cost and effort to get passport B. In addition there can be safety benefits to presenting a Canadian or Irish passport instead of an American passport in some places that are hostile to Americans. The speculation about his motives from an unnamed person appears way off base and maybe even harmful to the subject who is sitting in a Russian jail. Legacypac ( talk) 05:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
It's not so much a requirement as it is that documenting a citizenship in that country avoids lots and lots of questions and paperwork and time. And nobody travels on a US passport if they have a choice in the matter. Canada and UK would also mean better visa possibilities in Commonwealth Countries. Until Brexit, a British passport also meant a better immigration status in Europe, which is, I suspect, the reason for the Irish passport. You do usually need a grandparent but the Irish sometimes approve applications based on more distant ancestors on a case-by-case basis, I have been told. Bottom line, it's not that astonishing, even if it has managed to épater les bourgeois Elinruby ( talk) 21:25, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Some sources say that the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department says that he never worked for them. What is the upshot on this? Abductive ( reasoning) 18:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
It appears from the source now cited https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/michigan-company-releases-statement-regarding-employee-detained-in-russia_ to be something Whalen said in "court documents", which is where his erroneous education info came from. Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 00:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Here’s a poor source: https://whatsnew2day.com/american-charged-by-russia-with-being-a-spy-cultivated-contacts-in-moscow-for-years/ that says:
Whelan claimed in a 2013 statement that he was a former sheriff's deputy in Washtenaw County and a policeman for the city of Chelsea. Washtenaw County told the Post that they had no record of Whelan's job, and Chelsea police records showed that he was working as a "part-time police officer," as a dispatcher, a border guard and a caretaker.
Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 00:34, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
References
I'm Paul Whelan's twin brother. It is not my intent to suggest you adopt any edits, merely to point out things that might help your efforts or call attention to things that I don't think are properly sourced.
Thanks for your careful editing. Davidpwhelan ( talk) 20:36, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Does it seem to anyone else that the paper message Paul wrote from captivity in Russia may have contained hidden meaning(s)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowmessage ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Despite the popular saying, "Once a Marine, always a Marine", "former Marine" is the appropriate way to refer to someone who is no longer a member of the Marine Corps and is not legally retired from the Marine Corps. The USMC Museum itself refers to "former Marines". Reliable sources refer to Whelan as a "former Marine". [3] [4] [5] It is not accurate to say Whelan is currently a Marine. Schazjmd (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
According to THIS OFFICIAL MARINE PUBLICATION -- ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS CHART [1] those who have had a BCD are INELIGIABLE to wear their uniform. Therefore it is NOT appropriate to display a photo of him in uniform.
Mikelieman ( talk) 23:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Since there is a Paul Whelen page already in existence. This page needs a disambiguation between the other established page or this page should be deleted. Brawling ( talk) 13:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to propose a revision to the lead to more clearly summarize the article:
Thoughts? Schazjmd (talk) 16:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
The fact that the CIA wouldn't recruit such a person doesn't bear much relevance to the charge - spying. Doesn't matter who for. Might not be government at all. It's plausible he might have been spying for purely corporate purposes - a computer security corporation could benefit greatly from having a list of FSB contacts as well. 174.76.42.133 ( talk) 20:10, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
It is very relevant; unless things have changed since I was last there, Russia doesn't charge corporate espionage cases as seriously. He got 16 years, do you really think he was charged with stealing secrets from their auto industry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8803:950E:8F00:355D:C963:415A:1CD9 ( talk) 22:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
A single Russian-language source MBK claims Whelan had 80,000 dollars on him, as opposed to 80,000 roubles ($1,147). Obviously if Paul Whelan had that much money on him, it would look suspicious. Paul says it was roubles. So does his brother David, who insists this single Russian publication is defaming Paul with a lie. David told the Ann Arbor Observer that he has repeatedly tried to take this libel out of Wikipedia but unscrupulous editors keep putting it back.
Per BLP, I think the likely defamation must be removed. But if some editor wants to keep it, I think you must let readers know that Whelan's family insists this claim of 80,000 dollars (as opposed to roubles) is libelous, as I've done in my current version. You cannot put in a vicious claim about someone and not allow them the chance to argue it is false. Wikipedia always insists on both sides of a conflict. So if you include the defamatory Russian-language source, you must also include Whelan's brother not only calling it a grotesque lie but mentioning that he personally tried to edit Wikipedia to remove it.
In addition to being a violation of wikipedia policy, I believe it is also a violation of law and would subject the editor to a libel lawsuit. Per the NYT v. Sullivan standard, it is libelous to publish untrue defamatory information with "actual malice", which is defined as publishing "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not"
I think after an editor is aware of the vociferous claims of David Whelan, anyone who continues to publish this single obscure Russian-language source -- which could very well have gotten its facts wrong -- without allowing for the strenuous rebuttal by Paul's family -- is acting with actual malice. GreekParadise ( talk) 03:04, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Paul Whelan (security director) 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 |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've used the Daily Mail to support some bio details because they currently have the most indepth coverage. They cite public records and I have no reason to doubt the info, but as better sources become available they should be substituted. Legacypac ( talk) 19:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
The subject was born in Canada = Canadian. His parents were UK citizens so he was also born UK. He was raised in the US which suggests the family immigrated when he was a child. No surprise he is an American. For a British person to get an Irish passport is easy. I'm failing to see what the competition is or why we should mention it. Legacypac ( talk) 20:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
He has multiple citizenships because of his birth situation and family move to the US. The passports are only a matter of filling out applications. It is not like baseball card collecting. We should definitely include his citizenships. Legacypac ( talk) 20:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Canada citizenship because born in Canada US citizenship likely because the family moved there UK parents gave him UK citizenship at birth Not totally clear where the Irish citizenship came from but it was not via marriage (never married) and nothing suggests he lived there so it most likely is by decent from a parent or grandparent (see Irish nationality law). Therefore he was likely entitled to the Irish passport from birth. No evidence on how he got US citizenship (immigration or because a parent held it) but the other three are either definately or nearly definately gained at birth. Legacypac ( talk) 09:12, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
It is not "trouble" if you travel a lot - it is required. Generally any citizen of any country is expected/required to enter that country using a passport issued by that country. If he shows up at the Canadian border and presents an American passport he is committing an offence or at least could be denied admission. Also visa requirements differ by passport. Gaining visa free access to just one other country with passport B not offered by passport A can pay for the cost and effort to get passport B. In addition there can be safety benefits to presenting a Canadian or Irish passport instead of an American passport in some places that are hostile to Americans. The speculation about his motives from an unnamed person appears way off base and maybe even harmful to the subject who is sitting in a Russian jail. Legacypac ( talk) 05:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
It's not so much a requirement as it is that documenting a citizenship in that country avoids lots and lots of questions and paperwork and time. And nobody travels on a US passport if they have a choice in the matter. Canada and UK would also mean better visa possibilities in Commonwealth Countries. Until Brexit, a British passport also meant a better immigration status in Europe, which is, I suspect, the reason for the Irish passport. You do usually need a grandparent but the Irish sometimes approve applications based on more distant ancestors on a case-by-case basis, I have been told. Bottom line, it's not that astonishing, even if it has managed to épater les bourgeois Elinruby ( talk) 21:25, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Some sources say that the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department says that he never worked for them. What is the upshot on this? Abductive ( reasoning) 18:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
It appears from the source now cited https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/michigan-company-releases-statement-regarding-employee-detained-in-russia_ to be something Whalen said in "court documents", which is where his erroneous education info came from. Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 00:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Here’s a poor source: https://whatsnew2day.com/american-charged-by-russia-with-being-a-spy-cultivated-contacts-in-moscow-for-years/ that says:
Whelan claimed in a 2013 statement that he was a former sheriff's deputy in Washtenaw County and a policeman for the city of Chelsea. Washtenaw County told the Post that they had no record of Whelan's job, and Chelsea police records showed that he was working as a "part-time police officer," as a dispatcher, a border guard and a caretaker.
Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 00:34, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
References
I'm Paul Whelan's twin brother. It is not my intent to suggest you adopt any edits, merely to point out things that might help your efforts or call attention to things that I don't think are properly sourced.
Thanks for your careful editing. Davidpwhelan ( talk) 20:36, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Does it seem to anyone else that the paper message Paul wrote from captivity in Russia may have contained hidden meaning(s)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowmessage ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Despite the popular saying, "Once a Marine, always a Marine", "former Marine" is the appropriate way to refer to someone who is no longer a member of the Marine Corps and is not legally retired from the Marine Corps. The USMC Museum itself refers to "former Marines". Reliable sources refer to Whelan as a "former Marine". [3] [4] [5] It is not accurate to say Whelan is currently a Marine. Schazjmd (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
According to THIS OFFICIAL MARINE PUBLICATION -- ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS CHART [1] those who have had a BCD are INELIGIABLE to wear their uniform. Therefore it is NOT appropriate to display a photo of him in uniform.
Mikelieman ( talk) 23:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Since there is a Paul Whelen page already in existence. This page needs a disambiguation between the other established page or this page should be deleted. Brawling ( talk) 13:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to propose a revision to the lead to more clearly summarize the article:
Thoughts? Schazjmd (talk) 16:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
The fact that the CIA wouldn't recruit such a person doesn't bear much relevance to the charge - spying. Doesn't matter who for. Might not be government at all. It's plausible he might have been spying for purely corporate purposes - a computer security corporation could benefit greatly from having a list of FSB contacts as well. 174.76.42.133 ( talk) 20:10, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
It is very relevant; unless things have changed since I was last there, Russia doesn't charge corporate espionage cases as seriously. He got 16 years, do you really think he was charged with stealing secrets from their auto industry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8803:950E:8F00:355D:C963:415A:1CD9 ( talk) 22:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
A single Russian-language source MBK claims Whelan had 80,000 dollars on him, as opposed to 80,000 roubles ($1,147). Obviously if Paul Whelan had that much money on him, it would look suspicious. Paul says it was roubles. So does his brother David, who insists this single Russian publication is defaming Paul with a lie. David told the Ann Arbor Observer that he has repeatedly tried to take this libel out of Wikipedia but unscrupulous editors keep putting it back.
Per BLP, I think the likely defamation must be removed. But if some editor wants to keep it, I think you must let readers know that Whelan's family insists this claim of 80,000 dollars (as opposed to roubles) is libelous, as I've done in my current version. You cannot put in a vicious claim about someone and not allow them the chance to argue it is false. Wikipedia always insists on both sides of a conflict. So if you include the defamatory Russian-language source, you must also include Whelan's brother not only calling it a grotesque lie but mentioning that he personally tried to edit Wikipedia to remove it.
In addition to being a violation of wikipedia policy, I believe it is also a violation of law and would subject the editor to a libel lawsuit. Per the NYT v. Sullivan standard, it is libelous to publish untrue defamatory information with "actual malice", which is defined as publishing "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not"
I think after an editor is aware of the vociferous claims of David Whelan, anyone who continues to publish this single obscure Russian-language source -- which could very well have gotten its facts wrong -- without allowing for the strenuous rebuttal by Paul's family -- is acting with actual malice. GreekParadise ( talk) 03:04, 12 May 2023 (UTC)