Jump to content

Talk:John F. Kennedy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 111: Line 111:
JFK was a very flawed president. As a man he was amoral, sex-obsessed and egotistical. His extra-marital escapades were legendary. Politically he began the US intervention in Vietnam, nearly caused WW3 through misjudging the Soviets over Cuba. His invasion of Cuba was as misguided as anything the Bush dynasty undertook. He was possibly associated with the mafia. Yet the article is entirely positive about him. Why is there no hint of any criticism or suggestion that he was anything other than the best president the USA ever had? More balance is called for.[[User:Royalcourtier|Royalcourtier]] ([[User talk:Royalcourtier|talk]]) 07:19, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
JFK was a very flawed president. As a man he was amoral, sex-obsessed and egotistical. His extra-marital escapades were legendary. Politically he began the US intervention in Vietnam, nearly caused WW3 through misjudging the Soviets over Cuba. His invasion of Cuba was as misguided as anything the Bush dynasty undertook. He was possibly associated with the mafia. Yet the article is entirely positive about him. Why is there no hint of any criticism or suggestion that he was anything other than the best president the USA ever had? More balance is called for.[[User:Royalcourtier|Royalcourtier]] ([[User talk:Royalcourtier|talk]]) 07:19, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
:The article is balanced and written in [[WP:NPOV]], neutral point of view. The "affairs", "intervention" in Vietnam (which did not start with his administration) and Cuban-Missile Crisis are all covered. No where does it state anything of "being the best president"; in fact, I know of no article on Wikipedia which states that about any president. By your comments, clearly you have your opinions. BTW-Wikipedia does not allow [[WP:OR]]; original research and our personal opinions, including my own do not matter. Besides npov, what is written must have [[WP:RS]] sources and disagreements on content are settled by discussion and consensus by editors on the talk page, herein. I would point to [[Wikipedia:Core content policies]] for further information. [[User:Kierzek|Kierzek]] ([[User talk:Kierzek|talk]]) 11:47, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
:The article is balanced and written in [[WP:NPOV]], neutral point of view. The "affairs", "intervention" in Vietnam (which did not start with his administration) and Cuban-Missile Crisis are all covered. No where does it state anything of "being the best president"; in fact, I know of no article on Wikipedia which states that about any president. By your comments, clearly you have your opinions. BTW-Wikipedia does not allow [[WP:OR]]; original research and our personal opinions, including my own do not matter. Besides npov, what is written must have [[WP:RS]] sources and disagreements on content are settled by discussion and consensus by editors on the talk page, herein. I would point to [[Wikipedia:Core content policies]] for further information. [[User:Kierzek|Kierzek]] ([[User talk:Kierzek|talk]]) 11:47, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

== Cuban Missile Crisis ==

Kennedy also agreed to remove US missiles from Italy, not just Turkey. ([[Special:Contributions/86.133.255.131|86.133.255.131]] ([[User talk:86.133.255.131|talk]]) 12:00, 10 May 2016 (UTC))

Revision as of 12:00, 10 May 2016

Template:Vital article

Former good article nomineeJohn F. Kennedy was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 8, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
November 17, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 29, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee


External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on John F. Kennedy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First Paragraph Bias

I am not a wikipedian but was struck by how oddly biased the intro paragraph of this page is compared to other pages of similarly prominent people and topics. I would consider myself very pro-Kennedy overall, but I believe that the issues are much more stylistic than ideological.

Particularly:

-"abolition of the federal death penalty in the District of Columbia," is an odd choice for the introduction to a US president when the topic doesn't even appear in Capital punishment by the United States federal government.

-The whole last sentence "Kennedy also avoided any significant increase in the American presence in Vietnam, refusing to commit combat troops and keeping the level of others, mostly military advisors, to only 16,000, compared to the 536,000 troops committed by his successor, Lyndon Johnson, by 1968." provides absolutely no context and seems to be making an editorial rather than factual point. It also is insanely specific for what is, again, the introductory paragraph for a very broad-ranging article.

Again, I never edit Wikipedia, but have come to rely on it and trust it, particularly for very high-profile topics. This was a very jarring bit of text to read for an article that I would assume to be highly refined due to its subject matter. I think the community can do better. 69.130.12.129 (talk) 04:52, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.130.12.129 (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are right on both points. The death penalty in DC was not enough of a major issue to justify placement in the lead. Comparing Kennedy's smaller Vietnam escalation to Johnson's is deceptive, because they were faced with different circumstances. Johnson was also reluctant to commit American troops. LBJ promised in 1964 not to "send American boys to do the job that Vietnamese boys should be doing" (I know, it's not an exact quote). The truth is that no one knows what Kennedy would have done had he not been assassinated. A discussion of what Kennedy might have done is perhaps appropriate down in the body of the article, but not in the lead, and not in such POV terms.
Well, there's certainly not any long-term consensus favoring the bit about Vietnam, which was added by an editor with a history of overt POV-pushing just last month.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 05:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closeness to nuclear war

It's said in this article and several others that proximity of nuclear war had never been greater than during Cuban Missile Crisis. Well, if you'll read about the Madman theory stuff, that statement doesn't seem to be objective and is more of a yellow press stuff. Ibmua (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and military career split

I've thought that in regards to previous presidents having separate articles of their early lives, maybe JFK should as well. I think there's enough content and I certainly could find more. My proposal would be to have a separate article for both his early life and his tenure in the Navy. How's that sound? Informant16 23 April 2016

Well, as far as the "military"/US Navy, I think it is well covered, both here and in the Motor Torpedo Boat PT-109 and Motor Torpedo Boat PT-59 articles. Otherwise, it would be a lot of un-needed article redundancy. Kierzek (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough on the Navy, but I think his life before that (1917 -1940) would qualify. There's plenty of content out there about his relationships with his family, his duties relating to his father, the impact of his schooling and early illnesses that I think can suffice an article. Informant16 23 April 2016
It should be pretty easy to put something together from this article; his parent's articles and Kennedy family article and by using RS sources therein. I must say that I don't really see a need for it and it may be a WP:contentfork but we shall see. Kierzek (talk) 22:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assembling some content in my sandbox. I'll present it to you when I'm done. Informant16 6 May 2016
Something tells me that it would be full of redundancies that could easily be discussed here in the main bio, but I'm willing to at least preview it before making a definitive call. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:10, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You know what? Forget it. You haven't seen it but have already concluded that it most likely will be nothing but trash so I'll cease production. Informant16 6 May 2016
No; I specifically said I would preview it before making a definitive call. In other words, I am willing to give it a chance before saying "create" or "do not create" subarticle. Having suspicions doesn't equate to being certain on something. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:32, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're already poised to reject it and there's no point in working any further on it if you're just going to do that. Here's what I have so far: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Informant16/sandbox Informant16 6 May 2016

JFK and cigarettes

Supposedly, JFK smoked a single cigarette a day, which seems very unusual for a cigarette smoker. Any truth to this? 24.51.217.118 (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He smoked cigars; his wife Jackie, smoked cigarettes. Kierzek (talk) 18:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Kennedy smoked cigarettes as well as cigars. (86.133.255.131 (talk) 11:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Criticism

JFK was a very flawed president. As a man he was amoral, sex-obsessed and egotistical. His extra-marital escapades were legendary. Politically he began the US intervention in Vietnam, nearly caused WW3 through misjudging the Soviets over Cuba. His invasion of Cuba was as misguided as anything the Bush dynasty undertook. He was possibly associated with the mafia. Yet the article is entirely positive about him. Why is there no hint of any criticism or suggestion that he was anything other than the best president the USA ever had? More balance is called for.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:19, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is balanced and written in WP:NPOV, neutral point of view. The "affairs", "intervention" in Vietnam (which did not start with his administration) and Cuban-Missile Crisis are all covered. No where does it state anything of "being the best president"; in fact, I know of no article on Wikipedia which states that about any president. By your comments, clearly you have your opinions. BTW-Wikipedia does not allow WP:OR; original research and our personal opinions, including my own do not matter. Besides npov, what is written must have WP:RS sources and disagreements on content are settled by discussion and consensus by editors on the talk page, herein. I would point to Wikipedia:Core content policies for further information. Kierzek (talk) 11:47, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cuban Missile Crisis

Kennedy also agreed to remove US missiles from Italy, not just Turkey. (86.133.255.131 (talk) 12:00, 10 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_F._Kennedy&oldid=719557016"