Jump to content

Talk:Chris Wakim

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

Request for Comment

[edit]
Agreed. It's not fraud unless he's convicted under that charge. John Broughton 13:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The criteria for Category:Impostors is "individuals whose principal claim to notoriety is in having passed themselves off as a person or type of person whom they are not. Individual mainly notable for other reasons, who may have made misrepresentations during their lives or careers, are not included here. For example, a politician or celebrity who had incidentally exaggerated their achievements is not an imposter, in this sense." This one is a clear and obvious call; politicians who exaggerated what they did are explicitly excluded by the criteria on the category.
WP:BLP, our policy on biographies of living people, says that we have to hold negative material about living people to the highest standards of sourcing, and remove it until it is so sourced. It also says:
"Biographies of living people should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. While a strategy of eventualism may apply to other subject areas, badly written biographies of living persons should be stubbed or deleted.



The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable third party sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral, factual, and understated, avoiding both a sympathetic point of view and an advocacy journalism point of view."
The requirement to be understated would mean that until non-partisan reliable sources describe him as a fraudster in their own voice (not quoting someone else), we can't so describe, and that even then we don't have to so describe. So this category (or actually Category:American fraudsters) should not be applied on the evidence presented. GRBerry 14:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Master's degree - puzzle

[edit]

Here are three facts:

  • The Arab American News reported that "After his command, the Army facilitated Wakim’s graduate studies, allowing him to pursue a Master's of Arts degree at Harvard University."[1]
  • Wakim told reporters "I earned a degree at night while acting as an infantry officer." [2]
  • The Army does not require officers to get permission to take classes outside of duty hours.

The puzzle is that the Army sometimes does authorize officers to get a masters degree while on active duty (the officer must commit to staying in the Army for additional years). I'm probably reading too much into this, however, by thinking that Wakim is trying to imply that he was so favorted - but I'd appreciate anyone else's feedback. Maybe Wakim was saying that the Army helped pay his tuition. [3] John Broughton 13:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a veteran I may be able to clear this up. While I know nothing about Chris Wakim in particular, no one in the armed forces (officer or enlisted) needs permission to pursue educational studies during off duty hours. However, it would require permission and a good deal of paperwork to become a full time student: the service would pay tuition and expenses plus a modest stipend in return for an extension in the person's term of service. Both of these options are different from the G.I. bill, which becomes accessible only after a service member ceases to be active duty. What many people do is begin a degree during active service by taking evening or online courses, then transfer the credits and become full time students when they return to civilian life.
Not knowing the details of Chris Wakim's claims, it looks like either:
  • He earned a degree by studying part-time while on active duty, which doesn't imply that he was accepted into any selective program.
  • He earned most of a degree while on active duty and completed the degree as a civilian, which might be a slight exaggeration or a journalist's misquote. Durova 14:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the Masters programs at the Extension School are not as easy as you think. Less than half of the people that attempt the program actually finish the degree. To apply you have to complete three courses with a B or higher. The thesis seminar requirement weeds people out and less than half remain to be accepted into the program and even less than those admitted go to finish the ALM. It may be a part time Harvard program, but the standards are still pretty high.

Veteran status and VFW comment

[edit]
Wakim’s claim that he is a "Gulf War veteran" has been challenged. "To be considered a veteran of the first Gulf War, one must receive the Southwest Asia Service Medal. The absence of the medal makes one a Gulf War-era veteran." said a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Wakim said he does not have that medal.

Read that again; the quotation either should have a "(sic)" or be corrected. As is, it looks like, previously unbeknownst to me, I'm a Gulf War veteran! Cool! --BDD 04:20, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Raw Story Link Wrong

[edit]

The Raw Story link thats attached to his education piece is wrong. It states that Harvard Extension is not a part of Harvard University but only affiliated with it. Harvard Extension is a part of the University and a part of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. It is just a division of the Continuing Education School. Secondly, the program is not wholly open enrollement. You cannot just sign up for a class and get a degree. You have to take 3 classes and get a B- average (2.5) GPA. Even then that is just the minimum and usually a 3.0 is more of a shoe in. Also, after completing the three classes plus a writing extensive course, you then formally apply to the program, (i.e. resume, application, essays, letter of rec.) while admissions reviews your application. So the notion that it's a fully open enrollement program is way off the mark. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.64.14.149 (talk) 00:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Actually, you described the undergraduate degree program. Wakim was in the Master's program which requires a 3.0 minimum and a thesis seminar which is supposedly a class that 'weeds' out the weak from the strong. It is a lot harder to get into than the undergraduate program. Mr. Wakim set himself up by lying to the public about recieving an MPP from the KSG. He deserves the misinformation about his real degree. The sad thing is that others with the same degree will have to be stigmatized because of their fellow colleague's actions. Lastly, it's scary that the media can just outright lie about people's colleges like that. Harvard would not be stupid enough to toy with their brand name and "affiliate" themselves with a diploma mill. Their Extension School is still held up to the University's standards.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chris Wakim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chris_Wakim&oldid=1202464275"