Talk:Douglas Macgregor

POV tag

Neutrality? Hah! Did Macgregor write this about himself? In any case, it's such a puff piece it's unreal! It is also much too long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.251.110.131 (talk) 15:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the unsigned user above - this must be the worst example of PR puffery that I've seen on Wikipedia, which reflects very badly on Col. MacGregor, making him look like an ultra-vain self-promoter rather than a distinguished military thinker. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

MacGregor is the world's smartest man, and also the best-looking. --68.227.131.149 (talk) 06:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I agree he's smart, but for a "puff" piece, this entry sure still gets it wrong: MacGregor was tasked to brief Gen. Franks's staff only after Gen. Franks insisted he could do nothing, according to MacGregor, in less than 6 mo., & then handed SECDEF the '91 invasion plan; MacGregor's plan was redacted until it almost disappeared, altho the article only tangentially credits MacGregor with being its author. 138.162.128.53 (talk) 11:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

There is no doubt that Macgregor is very intelligent and capable man-I served with him prior to and during Desert Storm. There are some minor inconsistencies about his role during our campaign in Iraq but his leadership as 2nd Squadron's operations officer had a positive impact on the operation within his span of control. All of us that know Doug realizes that his ego sometimes can distract people from his brilliant insight-Toujours Prêt

Macgregor is obviously "Steelgunner 77" (read back in the history), and the story presented here is the story he tells elsewhere...that he was a martyr to the system which refused to acknowledge his brilliance. He provides no citation, or evidence at all, that his career was terminated (most people think making it to full Colonel is a pretty successful career), nor are a host of things on this page supported by any evidence...and most of them don't matter. Cite his books, a paragraph about his military career, and that's it. Otherwise, I suggest, this be deleted as self-promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.185.55.77 (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that this page looks like self-promotion, and I suggest that it violates Wikipedia policy on self-published sources (specifically the "unduly self-serving" clause), on NPOV, and possibly on no original research. I suggest that the page be deleted or radically shortened until someone is ready to edit it into shape. It looks like there might be a related problem in Battle of 73 Easting. --Belgrano (talk) 22:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not Macgregor rather a current officer in the US Army. He is a good friend and teacher. He does not self promote himself but all of the errors on my own. Right now I am stuck in Iraq. Had we only listen to his ideas we wouldn't be in this crap mess that we are in. --Steelgunner1977 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steelgunner1977 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the tag as I've made edits to clean this article up. Please feel free to comment if any specific problems stand out to anyone. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 00:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with unsigned and Phil Bridger. This is 100% self promotion. I knew Doug before the war and during the war. He was only an officer at the right place and the right time. No doubt he deserved a medal for what he achieved and he received that medal. I agree this reflects badly on Doug, but it even degrades other soldiers that achieved much more. Please have this page deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Militarystrength (talk • contribs) 09:14, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Sources

• NYT news search.
• NPR news search. -Shootbamboo (talk) 04:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

If anyone has copies of these sources — Paul Greenberg, "A Tale of Two Colonels", Jewish World Review, 5 May 1999. — Richard Newman, "Renegades finish last", U.S. News and World Report, 28 July 1997, pages 33-35 (whole article preferred). please email them to me and leave a note at my talk page thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 00:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Here is the Newman piece: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/970728/archive_007519.htm The Greenberg article is also online. 98.233.155.56 (talk) 16:02, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

self published source

i noticed that this self-published source contains material that has closely mirrored this article. we should provide WP:inline citations but not rely too heavily in forming sections. -Shootbamboo (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

A note

I was asked to justify this edit. It's simple: just because a person is notable doesn't mean that every position they ever held is worthwhile mentioning. A list of views is little more than a section on a resume, unless those individual views are rigorously verified by multiple sources to indicate that they have an actual encyclopedic relevance. I could point to such things as WP:RS and WP:V, to which one might counter that some of the things I removed were indeed reliably verified (though not by multiple sources), but I am more interested in good article writing than in interpreting guidelines and policies as broadly as possible to include as much as possible. It's a matter of editorial judgment, if you will. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Basic data missing

How old is he? When and where was he born? What do we know about his parents and ancestors?--Oneiros (talk) 21:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Date of birth apparently wrong as given; see http://archives.dickinson.edu/sites/all/files/files-dmagazine/DCAM_030_3.pdf p.26 top left ("Mr. and Mrs. Norman K. MacGregor, Jr., of 6015 Lansdowne Avenue ...") 01:02, 12 November 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.182.115.103 (talk)

Role in 73 Easting

This article states that he "essentially directed" the battle, and that he "led" the majority of the tanks in the engagement. (in his role as squardon OO? Was he acting as the squadron commander? In the sense of being the lead tank in the formation? Not entirely clear. This is 2nd ("Cougar") Squadron, as I understand it, which it might be helpful to specify.) It's hard to relate this to the Battle of 73 Easting article which instead focuses on the actions of the various troop commanders. I don't know if that's a case of this article's editors being fond of Macgregor's book and talks on the subject, and the other article's preferring those of McMaster et al, but they would ideally refer to each other in a way that made it easier to follow between the two. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The source given for his role is U.S. News & World Report. Somehow this iffy-looking website is on our list of perennial reliable sources, but it seems fairly iffy to me. Here's the relevant part in full. "During the gulf war he was the squadron operations officer who essentially directed the Battle of 73 Easting, an early and telling encounter with an Iraqi Republican Guard unit. In a 23-minute burst of fighting, a troop of 10 U.S. tanks and 13 Bradley fighting vehicles destroyed nearly 70 Iraqi armored vehicles, with no "friendly" casualties. [\\] Macgregor orchestrated the battle from a tank near the front, taking risks that could have been criticized had the fight turned ugly. He was so involved in the shooting that he didn't request artillery support or report events to superiors until the battle was virtually over, according to one of his superior officers." First, there's the "essentially directed" thing. I dunno what that means, but he wasn't in command of the squadron, nor any of the ACR troops. Those officers all he mentioned in our own article on the battle and in the sources used for that: Macgregor doesn't. This sounds like puffery to me, and if this site's the only source for anything along those lines, it should be in a directly attributed quote, if we use it at all. Second, the next sentence switches from talking about the squadron to talking about an unspecified single troop -- which again, Macgregor wasn't in command of. I assume this is Eagle Troop, HR McMaster's command. But it muddles the numbers involved to switch from one to another in mid-par, either out of general confusion, or to make the odds sound yet more impression. But our current article here uses still others, with no explicit source, perhaps in an attempt to reconcile with the squadron (I believe actually four troops in total). I'm going to trim back and slap on some cn tags, in some proportion I haven't quite determined yet: suggestions welcome. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 23:35, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Dishonest presentation

The recent additions regarding his statements on Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine are misrepresenting his statements. He hasn’t spoken in favor of it. He gave tactical assessments of it. 2601:282:D00:A3B0:A4ED:44CF:F6A3:AF3E (talk) 00:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

“So when you say stay out of it, you mean no sanctions, no military aid, just let Russia take the portion of Ukraine they want to take?” Gowdy asked. “Yes. Absolutely,” Macgregor replied. “I see no reason why we should fight with the Russians over something that they have been talking about for years; we simply chose to ignore it.”[1]

soibangla (talk) 01:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The section is pretty extensively sourced. Now we do say "support" in wikivoice, and you might -- and evidently are going to -- quibble with that as an editorial choice. Perhaps you have some other suggested wording that captures the essence of his statements, in which he variously tells the Ukrainians to surrender, that their elected leader is a puppet, that the Russians need to bomb and kill more, and that the US and the West should do "absolutely" nothing about it? 109.255.211.6 (talk) 19:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

“Rootless Cosmopolitans”

MacGregor has used this term, a euphemism used by Stalin to persecute Soviet Jews, to refer to the alleged internal enemies of America. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:2146 (talk) 05:50, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeowch. Also reported on by Slate and by Media Matters, so I think clearly notable. Might need to be directly attributed, at least in the case of MMfA, but givem all three... 109.255.211.6 (talk) 08:47, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

No source for suggesting Russia be allowed to take whatever it wants

Having followed MacGregor for a while, I’ve never seen him write or say that Russia should take whatever it wants. Do we have a citation for this? 2601:40F:680:7880:68BD:4BA3:244B:E46E (talk) 15:28, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

No source for suggesting Russia be allowed to take whatever it wants

Having followed MacGregor for a while, I’ve never seen him write or say that Russia should take whatever it wants. Do we have a citation for this? 2601:40F:680:7880:68BD:4BA3:244B:E46E (talk) 15:42, 5 October 2022 (UTC)