Talk:Peter Strzok: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:22, 1 May 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter Strzok article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 90 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 December 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

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.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

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.

Biography C‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

United States: District of Columbia / FBI / Presidents C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject FBI (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Politics: American C‑class Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Law C‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement C‑class Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Espionage C‑class Low‑importance

	Peter Strzok is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of espionage, intelligence, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.EspionageWikipedia:WikiProject EspionageTemplate:WikiProject EspionageEspionage articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Minnesota C‑class Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Donald Trump C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Donald Trump, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Donald Trump on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Donald TrumpWikipedia:WikiProject Donald TrumpTemplate:WikiProject Donald TrumpDonald Trump articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why doesn't Lisa Page have her own page?

Both Strzok and Page are most famous for their text messages, and the role they have played in the Russia Collusion investigations by the IC Muller, as well as various Congressional committees.

Yet there is no Wikipedia page for Page, it refers here.

She seems as well known and important as Strzok to the story, why does she not rate her own page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZeroXero (talk • contribs) 21:12, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Page is only notable for this particular story linking her to Peter Strzok. Hence her story can be fully covered here. See WP:BLP1E as the relevant policy. — JFG ^talk 23:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As of 12/2/2019 Lisa Page has apparently become more of a news item on her own: ^[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by AltSyzygy (talk • contribs) 22:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/02/lisa-page-is-uniquely-convenient-target-trumps-standard-practice-belittling-women/

Fox News Commentary

Why does this section exist? Should there be sections for CNN Commentary, MSNBC Commentary, NYT or WaPo, etc? Does every article about a controversial political figure contain a section like this? I don't think so ! WBcoleman (talk) 23:51, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my edit undone

I added citations referencing the actual text messages and they were undone by Volunteer Marek. A link to primary documentation seems way better than links to news articles *about* the text messages. Am I missing something here? Nweil (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OPR investigation

The FBI OPR investigation of Strzok is highly relevant to his career as an FBI agent.

The data provided is (a) factual, (b) accurate, and (c) sourced.

The primary source for the information is the head of the FBI's OPR. The secondary source is Strzok himself (since he filed the letter as an exhibit to his lawsuit against the Attorney General.

a & b: so what? c: Wrong. It's two WP:PRIMARY sources. Read the link. --Calton | Talk 07:16, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Strzok1.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Documents

Looks like some new news with Strzok's involvment on the Michael Flynn case.[1][2][3][4][5] The Hill reporting notes from director of counterintelligence on what Strzok said "What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?".[6][7][8][9] PackMecEng (talk) 20:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your one and only non-opinion, reliable source there (that last Hill article) doesn't even mention the word "Strzok". I have removed several claims here that are not supported by the sources, and per WP:BLP, you may not make unsupported claims about a person, particularly defamatory ones. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, don't touch my post again. Not a BLP vio and certainly reliably sources. PackMecEng (talk) 21:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't publish defamatory falsehoods again. The source says nothing about who said that statement. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure of a purposed text yet, but this is pretty fresh and something people should keep an eye on. I am sure this article will become popular fairly soon. PackMecEng (talk) 20:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/02/lisa-page-is-uniquely-convenient-target-trumps-standard-practice-belittling-women/

[1]

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 == New Documents ==
-Looks like some new news with Strzok's involvment on the [[Michael Flynn]] case.[https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/495627-flynn-documents-are-the-smoking-gun-on-comeys-fbi][https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/30/fbi-closed-flynn-case-early-2017-peter-strzok-orde/][https://www.newsmax.com/us/strzok-page/2020/04/30/id/965493/][https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-stopped-bureau-from-ending-flynn-probe-despite-lack-of-derogatory-evidence-unsealed-documents-reveal][https://www.foxnews.com/media/brett-tolman-peter-strzok-was-at-the-heart-of-the-trump-russia-storm] The Hill reporting notes from director of counterintelligence {{redacted}}.[https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/495401-fbi-officials-discussed-trying-to-get-flynn-to-lie-in-interview-get][https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/michael-flynns-defense-claims-fbi-notes-show-agents-tried-to-entrap-the-former-national-security-adviser/2020/04/29/fbbe0f30-8a67-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html] [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 20:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
+Looks like some new news with Strzok's involvment on the [[Michael Flynn]] case.[https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/495627-flynn-documents-are-the-smoking-gun-on-comeys-fbi][https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/30/fbi-closed-flynn-case-early-2017-peter-strzok-orde/][https://www.newsmax.com/us/strzok-page/2020/04/30/id/965493/][https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-stopped-bureau-from-ending-flynn-probe-despite-lack-of-derogatory-evidence-unsealed-documents-reveal][https://www.foxnews.com/media/brett-tolman-peter-strzok-was-at-the-heart-of-the-trump-russia-storm] The Hill reporting notes from director of counterintelligence on what Strzok said {{tq|"What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?"}}.[https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/495401-fbi-officials-discussed-trying-to-get-flynn-to-lie-in-interview-get][https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/michael-flynns-defense-claims-fbi-notes-show-agents-tried-to-entrap-the-former-national-security-adviser/2020/04/29/fbbe0f30-8a67-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html][https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/30/trump-would-consider-bringing-michael-flynn-back-into-administration.html][https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/trump-hinting-pardon-criminal-friends-flynn-stone.html] [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 20:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 :Your one and only non-opinion, reliable source there (that last Hill article) doesn't even mention the word "Strzok". I have removed several claims here that are not supported by the sources, and per [[WP:BLP]], you may not make unsupported claims about a person, particularly defamatory ones. [[User:NorthBySouthBaranof|NorthBySouthBaranof]] ([[User talk:NorthBySouthBaranof|talk]]) 21:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 ::Yeah, don't touch my post again. Not a BLP vio and certainly reliably sources. [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 21:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)