Jump to content

Talk:Alexander Vindman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2019

[edit]

Replace "Trump-Ukraine scandal" with "Trump-Ukraine investigation". That's what it is. 47.233.36.122 (talk) 01:00, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Declined; the investigation is into the scandal. Neutralitytalk 01:32, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, wrong page. This is just linking to it. MartinezMD (talk) 02:17, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, the word "scandal" is a conclusion regarding the outcome. In fact, the entire article is written as if Vindman is a wonderful, stainless, and pure human being when there are other facts, such as him being chastised for making anti-American remarks by Hickman (his prior superior officer), and such as him having leaked to perhaps Ciaramella, which cast Vindman's story into an entirely more dubious light. However, until the facts are fully revealed, why have the main article look like a public relations piece written by the DNC? Somebody should try to rewrite the article and give it at least a modicum of fairness and at least a slight appearance of neutrality.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.152.216.213 (talk)
If you have a problem with the article named Trump–Ukraine scandal, then you go there to suggest a title change for it. We're just linking to it. As for Vindman, try reading WP:BLP first. MartinezMD (talk) 02:09, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request Edit.

[edit]

This is small, but words matter. I've pasted the portion that I'm requesting be edited with edits written in UPPER CASE. It's from the "Career" section, paragraph 1.

After graduating from THE State University of New York at Binghamton in 1998, Vindman WAS COMMISSIONED AS A SECOND LIEUTENANT IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY.[3] He completed the Infantry Officer Basic Course (IOBC) at Fort Benning in 1999 and STATIONED the next year IN South Korea, where he LEAD AN infantry and an anti-armor platoon.[3] In addition to overseas ASSIGNMENTS IN South Korea and Germany, Vindman is a combat veteran.[3] He was deployed to Iraq to take part in the OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM from September 2004 to September 2005.[2] In October 2004,[2] he WAS WOUNDED BY a roadside bomb in Iraq, for which he WAS AWARDED a Purple Heart.[3] He was promoted to the rank of major in 2008,[6] and to lieutenant colonel in September 2015.[ Vance.meier (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since it has been edited already, perhaps this isn't something to discuss, but what were you suggesting? That too many words were being used? I am quite puzzled about this -- not about editing it down to where it is (the current verbiage is accurate and concise enough), but why you felt this was something that needed some kind of collaboration? Cyberherbalist (talk) 09:29, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2019

[edit]

Please correct the degree abbreviation in the sidebar. Vindman's degree is a Master of Arts, usually abbreviated "MA" but abbreviated "AM" by Harvard. Either of those abbreviations can be regarded as correct, but his degree is not an MPA (Master of Public Administration, or "Master in Public Administration" at Harvard), as the sidebar currently suggests. (The degree name in the main text, master of arts, is correct. The degree abbreviation in the sidebar is not.) 149.61.81.58 (talk) 22:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC) Done! VanEman (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

add Trump administration distributed talking points to discredit Vindman ?

[edit]

X1\ (talk) 01:41, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear pronoun usage

[edit]

Please clarify to whom the instances of the pronouns, "he" and "his" refer in the cited section below:

"Vindman states that Bolton cut the meeting short, and that both he and Fiona Hill told Ambassador Sondland that his comments were inappropriate, and that he reported the concerns to the NSC's lead counsel.[16]"

Footnote [16] in itself does not do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B58y (talk • contribs) 02:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

B58y,  Done. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carol Kitman on Vindman Twins

[edit]

Carol Kitman was quoted in a NY Times article about Vindman, since she has know him since he was a child. On her professional photography site, (https://www.carolkitman.com/Artist.asp?ArtistID=20867&Akey=TWLNV9G5&ajx=1#!Group1_Pf188611)she writes the following about the twins: "The Vindmans in Brighton Beach and Beyond" All images are the property of Carol Kitman. Do not reproduce without permission. Write me at Leicayou@icloud.com or call 201 321 7681 for any usage of these photos.

I first saw Sanya and genya Vindman and their grandmother, Mrs. Kalmanovitch, under the El on Brighton Beach Avenue in Brooklyn's "Little Odessa". It was more than 30 years ago. The Vindman family had emigrated to the US from Kiev in the Ukraine in December of 1979. Semyon Vindman wanted a free and better life for his 3 sons - the twins, then 4, and 11 year old Leonid. Their mother had recently died, in Kiev and when they came to America, their maternal grandmother came along to help with the boys.

The situation of their lives resonated because my mother also was brought here by family - a very small girl who had lost her mother in the old country." a user may need to cick on the "more button at the end of the first paragraph but the rest of the info is there. Do we need to cite 2 pages to include the entire paragraph of info? MartinezMD seems to want it a certain way... — Preceding unsigned comment added by VanEman (talk • contribs)

You are correct; I want it a certain way. I want it to follow WP policy and have a reference support the statement it follows. Simple enough. The sentence said "The twins appear briefly with their maternal grandmother in the Ken Burns documentary The Statue of Liberty". Kitman's webpage has 34 mostly unlabeled photographs that includes one of the twins' wedding and makes no mention of Ken Burns or the film. Where do you see it? That is why I removed it. MartinezMD (talk) 03:27, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MartinezMD, [1] --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 04:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Then use that link and not the previous one that did not support the statement. MartinezMD (talk) 04:33, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Terminated?

[edit]

First paragraph was altered today to say ye was fired on Feb 7. He wasn't. He was reassigned to the Pentagon. Renob88 (talk) 21:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

His White House assignment was supposed to go until July. He was terminated from the position. It is most certainly being fired. MartinezMD (talk) 22:48, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Terminated might be better, but in the end, it's what WP:Reliable sources say that counts. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:12, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
BeenAroundAWhile, the New York Times says "fired". – Muboshgu (talk) 04:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He's still active duty, hence reassigned to the Pentagon after he was fired and literally escorted out of the White House. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with using reassigned. That is sugar coating. CNN blamely states that both brothers were fired.

".. President Donald Trump fired two key impeachment witnesses, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert at the national security council, and US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland."

In a second article:

"Washington(CNN)President Donald Trump on Saturday defended the firing of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman from the National Security Council"

Don't like CNN? How about BBC?

"Trump defends firing impeachment witness Alexander Vindman"

Clearly the proper term is fired. I use that verb in the paragraph I added where Schumer called for IG investigation into witness retaliation. Pbmaise (talk) 12:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request Edit

[edit]

In the beginning of this article, it states that Vindman "is a United States Army lieutenant colonel who was the Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council (NSC) until he was dismissed on February 7, 2020." This wording is unintentionally confusing. In the United States Army, and the other branches of the United States Military, Dismissal is a Discharge Categorization equivalent to a Dishonorable Discharge or a Bad Conduct Discharge, which you can only receive for being convicted of a crime in a General Court-Martial.[1] I understand that this is meant to read that Vindman was dismissed from his position as the Director for European Affairs for the NSC, but just the word "dismissed" being used in this context has the ability to be seriously misinterpreted to the effect of readers thinking Vindman has been convicted of a crime for his actions in the Trump-Ukraine scandal. I would suggest that the word "dismissed" be changed to "reassigned". LordoftheBread (talk) 16:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're 100% correct on what the word "dismissed" means in the context of the UCMJ and court-martial (convicted enlisted members get dishonorable discharges, convicted officers get dismissed; in military parlance the term invokes extremely prejudicial perceptions as to what happened to the officer). For now, I'll change it to "reassigned" until other editors can come up with a better way (if necessary) to rephrase the lead to reflect what happened. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 16:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://jagdefense.com/military-law-information/

Jewish-Soviet immigrant.

[edit]

Notable Jewish-Soviet immigrant. Worth including in his personal life and in the group. Cannot add as the page is protected and I am at school. Source:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-officer-who-testified-against-trump-escorted-out-of-white-house/

121.210.33.50 (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly would you propose we add? The article text goes into detail on him being Jewish and coming from the USSR as a child. He's categorized in Category:American people of Ukrainian-Jewish descent. What's missing? – Muboshgu (talk) 21:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion (not) stalled

[edit]

RE: “At the time of his retirement, Vindman's promotion to the rank of colonel had been abnormally stalled by the administration.” I don’t think that’s true. It’s certainly not supported by the sources that are cited (currently [5] and [6]). Trump certainly floated the possibility but there’s no indication he took action on it. Here’s one source that states his promotion was on track: https://taskandpurpose.com/news/alexander-vindman-promotion . —97.79.29.52 (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Revisiting Fired vs. Dismissed

[edit]

There's some good discussion above regarding the proper word to use to describe Lt Col Vindman's move from the White House to the Pentagon. What's missing from that discussion is a good understanding of the purpose of the National Security Council staff. David P. Auerswald wrote a chapter titled "The Evolution of the NSC Process" in a The National Security Enterprise: Navigating the Labyrinth (2nd ed, edited by Roger George and Harvey Rishikof, published by Georgetown University Press, 2017). Here's how Auerswald described the purpose of the NSC:

"Robert Cutler, President Eisenhower's special assistant for national security affairs noted 'fundamentally, the Council is a vehicle for a President to use in accordance with its suitability to his plan for conducting his great office.' Colin Powell, President Reagan's final National Security Advisor, argued 'at the end of the day, the duty of the National Security Council staff and the assistant is to mold themselves to the personality of the president.' (p. 37).... since the 1947 National Security Act created the NSC system, presidents have operated in an era of expanded US international commitments, a huge national security bureaucracy, and tremendous public exceptions. Presidents have responded by turning to a combination of NSC staff support and special envoys. Both are under direct presidential control and are not beholden to federal agencies or the legislative branch." (p. 51).

Military officers infrequently serve in "nominative" positions, where the agency or department (e.g. the Army) nominates an officer (e.g. Vindman) and the receiving unit or agency (e.g. the National Security Council, or a US Embassy abroad) can approve or disapprove the nomination. These nominative positions are unlike "normal" military assignments in that the officers can be very easily removed with very little cause. In most military assignments, retribution for initiating a Congressional inquiry or an Inspector General complaint is strictly forbidden. However, in nominative positions, including those serving the Executive Office of the President, even small differences of opinion can be grounds for removal.

So I guess it's accurate to say that he was "fired," as long as the article makes clear that he was fired from the NSC, not the Army. It might be clearer to say that he was "removed," or is that just splitting hairs? More importantly, regardless of whether Vindman's concerns about Trump's handling of Ukraine were justified, once he reported his concerns, he was no longer in a position where he could effectively advise the President on European security affairs. That's an important fact that's missing from the article. --97.79.29.52 (talk) 00:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Vindman’s education

[edit]

In his memoir he states that his brother attended SUNY Binghamton and Alexander Vindman (the author) attended American University, so please clear up any questions and be more specific about his education. 76.182.121.146 (talk) 04:36, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request: Article cited but not linked

[edit]

Citation 35 cites an article from USA today but does not provide a link; I believe it is this article https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/14/vindman-impeachment-witness-no-investigation-despite-trump-firing/4763844002/

citation: USA Today, "Army Secretary: No investigation into Vindman, Army aide and impeachment witness fired by Trump", February 14, 2020 [] — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadowVibes (talk • contribs) 00:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. Corrected. MartinezMD (talk) 01:38, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Birthers

[edit]

The «né» and «née» are disrespectful and insulting to English-language readers. ÷ justinacolmena (talk) 21:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an English language reader and I'm not offended. There's also a policy you can read. See MOS:NEE. MartinezMD (talk) 02:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_Vindman&oldid=1205440277"