Talk:Félix Rodríguez (soldier)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Military (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Cuba (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cuba related articles 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Biography of Living Persons Standards[edit]

I have blanked out several portions of this article and the comments because they do not follow the Wikipedia official standard for Biographies of living persons. If you think a section was improperly blanked, it was probably because it did not have a high-quality verifiable source listed.

--Burzum 11:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Biased[edit]

This article is clearly biased. I attempted to make changes, but then realized I am not aware of the standards, etc. as of yet so I erased my changes. This article needs substantial editing to remove political bias.

You have failed to explain the bias. I have removed the bias template--Burzum 11:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

A blank declaration of bias is not convincing, you should at least mention your points of conflict and then provide some documentation. El Jigüey 1-3-06


Note: It is often alleged that Rodriguez' father and two brothers were executed by the Castro regime soon after it came to power. I'm not disputing whether it did or didn't, I'm simply seeking some source for this claim. Rodriguez says nothing about it in his book. Can anybody help with this?

I'm in favor of keeping it so wildly biased, as it serves as a good reminder to anyone reading it that they need to confirm anything they read here with a more trustworthy source. I had started to believe some of what I was reading until I realized how it was so comical that I remembered I should check elsewhere to see what was true and what was typical Wikipedia BS. --71.203.125.108 (talk) 08:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

TDC: Please do not revert or this will quickly go to Admin[edit]

TDC: welcome to the scholarly study of US relations with Latin America. Your Wikipedia web-page clearly states your political biases: you are a self-proclaimed "defender of capitalism against the 'Neo-Coms' ('neo-Communists')." "William Blum, Howard Zinn, George Galloway, Michael Moore, Naomi Klein, Robert Fisk, and [Noam] Chomsky sound exactly like Osama bin Laden." "Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who kept their swords." Your first words on your page are: "Wise words to bear in mind before picking a fight with The TDC'ster." You are welcome to these opinions. Wikipedia articles, however, require a NPOV. You are welcome to offer countervailing facts and sources to those on an existing page. You are are not welcome, however, to randomly delete well-documented and highly relevant material that happens to run against your views. You have done this repeatedly, and a complaint will soon be lodged against you. I suggest you work with Wikipedia guidelines, which will help create more informative and balanced web pages. Your contributions are welcome! But please do not delete the hard work of others just because you disagree with them politically. Stick to adding factual material and sources. 208.59.121.177 00:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

TDC: please stop the Vandalism. It can be hard when you start a Wikipedia page and future revisions take it in a direction you did not intend. But consider this part of the joy and beauty of learning on Wikipedia, exploring the unknown, making new bridges in understanding.
The information you are adding does not comply with WP:V, please read the policy and comply. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 00:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
That is a non sequiter, and does not address the concerns raised. Additionally, it is clear from your Talk page that you deliberately provoke conflicts rather than trying to resolve differences and make a better article. *shrug* That's too bad. I've posted as a warning of potential WP:VAND on your Talk page. 141.161.48.111 06:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

MONGO: please see Talk on TDC, and please engage in Discussion[edit]

(The following is cut-and-pasted from Barry Seal for ease of reference, as the same issues/people/time apply.) MONGO: Agreed it is vital to stick to the facts and NPOV. Article reverted, per ongoing conflict and attempts at discussion with TDC. MONGO, you understand your responsibilities as an Admin and you understand that Blanking Vandalism is not constructive. You also understand that not every single sentence or fact in an encyclopedia must be sourced, and that a pattern of mis-using Wiki guidelines (including NPOV, V, CITE, etc.) as a veiled attempt at partisanship or ideology is itself unacceptable behavior. Please identify which facts, if any, you believe need citations with the {{Fact}} template. Please also identify any particular examples of alleged "POV" and they will be fixed. The vast majority if not all of what you removed is sourced and NPOV. The fact that much was created by anons is irrelevant. Your blind support for TDC (three times now) calls into question your neutrality as an Admin, especially on topics outside your areas of expertise (natural parks, etc.).

Reference for other Admins: for background, please see User talk:TDC, and discussion above and on Talk:Barry Seal. Please note that this week TDC has already violated the terms of his parole for similar behavior. Please also note that twice before TDC has turned to Admin MONGO after engaging in revert wars and other unWikipedian behavior (on "Depleted uranium" and "What's the matter"/"Protect"), and (as far as I can tell) both times MONGO has been overruled.

Hey what's going on with this article?[edit]

Nobody should be adding anything that is not sourced, or deleting anything that is properly sourced. Both bad edits occurred today. The last revision subtracted something that was not sourced and added something not sourced. This is a recipe for disaster, misinformation, propaganda, and violations of all sorts of Wikipedia polcies. Will the person who added the stuff about the 2004 US presidential election either source it or delete it. If it is not verifiable, it does not belong here. Will the person who deleted sourced information (along with a whole lot of other nonsourced stuff) please pay closer attention. Thanks to all. Skywriter 22:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

For the record-- http://www.nndb.com/people/677/000107356/ -- is not an authoritative source. It is edited by users, same as Wikipedia. Anyone can upload anything. Find an acceptable source or delete this entry. Thanks. Skywriter 22:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ is also an unacceptable source because, like frontpagemagazine.com, it is obviously partisan. A link to the Senate Committee hearings themselves, or at the NSArchive is acceptable, and would enhance credibility. Skywriter 22:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Skywriter: for background on TDC and MONGO, see Talk above, and User talk:TDC (this section), and Talk:Barry Seal. As you note, MONGO (despite recently being made an Admin) is now engaging in ideologically-based selective blanking, thereby violating his neutrality and abusing his powers. At least he is now using {citation needed} templates, which is a step forward. But this page needs to be redone back to your helpful edits (thank you!) as of 19:09 tonight, and then merged with MONGO's most recent revisions. This will take time. Of course you're right about the John Kerry section -- this is hardly the most notable aspect of Felix Rodriguez' colorful life! *LOL* And that section is full of unsourced POV. Notice that TDC put it there in May 2004, during Kerry's campaign. I have allowed it to remain so far, and not complained about it's flagrant violation of NPOV, in the interest of compromise and moving this page forward. However, the fact that TDC and MONGO have left it unchallenged points to their right-wing ideological bias. (TDC is is proud of this, as noted in Talk above). Again, please note that it will take time to undue the damage MONGO has wrought on this page. I'm curious if other Wiki-users have experienced similar troubles with MONGO. 208.59.121.177 03:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
You will have troubles with me if you don't refrain from personal attacks. I think I have already covered this issue with you elsewhere, haven't I? I am not a recent admin...I have been an admin for well over six months. Your edits appear to utilize many poor sources that are not unbiased and in fact, a few of them are nothing more than blogs, really.--MONGO 04:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
"MONGO": please be civil -- "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar." I'm sure you mean well, but statements beginning with "You will have trouble with me if..." come across as threatening and are unbecoming to any Wiki user, let alone an Admin. I've read the links on TDC's pattern of behavior and can see what 208.59.121.177 means about POV; this is not a "personal attack," it is about neutrality. Frankly, the record speaks to his/her concerns.
In the latest "Edit summary" you unnecessarily use the command verb form -- "stop removing the bracket" ("please leave bracket" would be more than sufficient, or even say nothing, don't we have bigger fish to fry?) Of course there should be a closing bracket, I just missed it (why else would you think I'd leave the open-bracket?). As I noted in my "Edit summary", we had an editing conflict as I had been working on the Bush section for some time: " 'Editing Conflict' -- I tried to catch and add all M[ONGO]'s changes, hopefully did." In merging that section I tried to include your changes, but evidently I missed this one closing-bracket. Sorry about that! Six months may seem long on Wiki, but to those with white hair, who lived through the events described on this page, it is very recent indeed. 68.50.13.23 15:11, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
How many different IP"s are you going to use to edit here?...that is my point...respected users create an username and use only that username and log in each and everytime they edit. Continued acclaim that TDC or myself are biased because we have a content dispute with you is incivil. The same could be said in reverse, however, I have not done so. I may very well feel (and correctly at that) that your edits are biased...in fact, that feeling would not be without merit. With that said, you probably have fewer years on me than you may think, so you know you're not in communication with either an amateur or some teenager, not that age has anything to do with educated knowledge of this, which can be achieved by anyone with a mature mind. I'll be looking over your references, but also any further commentary about bias or wide eyed speculations about others additions, reverts being vandalism or any other commentary in regards to myself or others that see your edits as circumspect. You'll gain favor in my eyes and the community if you use only one newly created username when editing.--MONGO 18:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Republic of South Vietnam?????[edit]

Isn't this the provisional Communist government set up by the North Vietnamese after the defeat of the South??? Why would they give Rodriguez medals??? I think it should be The Republic of Vietnam which is more commonly known as South Vietnam. I tried to edit this but it is continually reverted back. Does anyone have a source????

My guess is this got caught up in broader editing discussions, and was accidentally deleted by mistake. I don't know this for sure; if I did so then I offer my apologies. I have changed it per your suggestion, to the following: The Republic of (south) Vietnam. I inserted the parenthetical "(South)" just in case someone intentionally put it there. I have no opinion or insight on this matter. Please feel free to remove the "(South)" if it would be more clear and accurate. Thank you for your contributions, and again sorry that this edit got changed without discussion. 68.50.13.23 18:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
In fact, after reading the South Vietnam page, I see that it is much more clear to simply state: by the South Vietnamese government, so I did that. Please revise if you like!

MONGO edits[edit]

MONGO's goal seems to be to remove all links from the article to prevent readers from seeing anything but MONGO's biased point of view. MONGO removed the link to the Cuban Revolution and inserted The 26th of July Movement (a non-existent article). MONGO removed the reference to Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista and inserted Batista, a link which forces the reader to choose between six different "Batista" articles. Another obvious attempt to confuse readers. Other examples: changed neutral "government" to loaded "regime", changed "South Vietnam" (correct reference) to "Republic of South Vietnam" (not the government referred to in the article), and removed a large number of supporting references and work completed by other individuals. These instances, on top of the numerous other points of bias added by MONGO and removal of relevent information left me no choice but to revert all edits by MONGO to the previous version. --Nc11

False Investigation by John Kerry[edit]

Nothing about John Kerry's witch hunt on Felix? Wow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.10.61 (talkcontribs) 2007-05-25t15:30:13z

Autheticity of Che/Rodríguez photo.[edit]

OTRS ticket 2008061710028799 disputes the claim that the photo is fake. Source(s) readable by article readers should soon be available. If no such reliable and accessable source(s) are provided within the next few weeks, feel free to remove the dispute notice. -- Jeandré, 2008-07-05t23:21z

Schnappschuss mit Che (documentary)[edit]

Currently the article utilizes the 2007 German documentary Schnappschuss mit Che to allege that the photo of Rodriguez and Che standing next to each other is fake (created). I however have not seen the film and thus can not speak on the credibility or evidence cited. Does anyone know where a review of this film can be located or perhaps the film itself (hopefully with sub-titles)? Moreover, User:Die4Dixie, has objected to inclusion or mention of the film - declaring it a WP:Fringe theory. However, I am not sure of the overall basis or evidence for the films supposed claim, nor what information Dixie is utilizing in his assessment.   Redthoreau (talk)RT 00:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

If it is credible, then third party sources will have widely reported it. Since this is a BLP, it should be removed until it is proven not to be a fringe theory.--Die4Dixie (talk) 00:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
File:Felix Ismael Rodriguez.jpg
Félix Rodríguez (left) and a recently captured Che Guevara (right) in La Higuera, Bolivia. October 9, 1967. Recently a documentary broadcast by a German television station under public law [4] alleged that the famous picture of Rodríguez with the captured Guevara is a forgery.[1][2][3][4]
The main arguments are:

Also appearing in the documentary is helicopter pilot Jaime Nino de Guzman, who transported Rodriguez to the small town of La Higuera in the Bolivian sierra, and Dino Brugioni, one of the foremost US photography experts, who expresses his conviction on camera that the legendary image was altered.

The chopper pilot's statement is crucial as he is confirmed as being the one who more than 40 years ago took the photo that has appeared in numerous history books since then.

"That photo was never taken," Nino de Guzman says categorically, however, adding immediately thereafter that the image is a falsification and that during the meeting between Che and Rodriguez, Guevara spat in the face of his captor and completely refused to speak with him.

His statement contradicts the version of the encounter that, up until now, Rodriguez had offered. He has said that he held a conversation on relatively friendly terms with Guevara, whose life he tried to save, but in the end he was not able to prevent his execution by the Bolivian soldiers who - as had been repeated over and over since that time - wanted to avoid an international trial.

The possible faking of the image allegedly taken on Oct 9, 1967, is certified also by Brugioni, who says that the sunlight illuminating Che and the Bolivian soldiers is different and emanates from a different angle than the light illuminating Rodriguez.

The expert also emphasises that Che's right arm seems to have been "shortened" just at the point where it touches Rodriguez's body, as if the image of the latter could have been added later to the snapshot.

Quotes from: Documentary alleges last photo of Che is fake [5] To my mind everybody can see on the photo that the sunlight illuminating Che and the Bolivian soldiers is different and emanates from a different angle than the light illuminating Rodriguez and that Che's right arm seems to have been "shortened" just at the point where it touches Rodriguez's body. Plausible or not? Does anybody knows an explanation for these inconsistencies Der Barbar (talk) 06:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

If you have forensic proof from experts, reported by third party sources, we will entertain them. This is a fringe theory, and has no part in this or the caption.Insert non-formatted text here
Dino Brugioni, one of the foremost US photography experts expresses his conviction on camera that the legendary image was altered.
You have asked, „Does anyone know where a review of this film can be located or perhaps the film itself“? You can view the company contact information for the film „A Snapshot with Che“ (Award: 2009 Gold Medal National/International Affairs at The New York Festivals) here: A Snapshot with Che -- Der Barbar (talk) 19:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I am German and just watched this documentation which can be found on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRX_i1HBKHY

Rodríguez says he asked Che for permission to shoot the picture and received the permission.

However, an expert figures out that the photo is undoubtedly a montage. It is evident that two pictures were put together, he explains. Sunlight and shade in the faces do not at all match. Witnesses confirm that this photo was not taken. Instead, they say, Che Guevara spit into Rodríguez’ face and refused to speak to Rodríguez. There was no dialogue among them. Rodríguez, witnesses say, wore another uniform the day he was on the site with Guevara.

In the film the last days, the capturing and killing of Che are described. As well as the friendship between Rodríguez and Dariel Alarcón Ramírez (“Benigno”) which developed after Alarcón defected from Cuba and took exile in Paris. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.202.91.5 (talk) 09:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ WDR: Interview mit dem Dokumentarfilmer Wilfried Huismann "Ein Werk der Konterrevolution" vom 9. Oktober 2007
  2. ^ taz: Der falsche Freund vom 8. Oktober 2007
  3. ^ Rückschau: Schnappschuss mit Che (WDR), Sendedatum: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2007, 22.45 Uhr im Ersten [1]
  4. ^ Documentary alleges last photo of Che is fake Berlin, October 11, 2007[2]
  5. ^ Documentary alleges last photo of Che is fake Berlin, October 11, 2007[3]

Removal of Specious content[edit]

I have read completely the source cited to say that Che was in the "custody" of Félix. The citated material does not substantiate this and has been removed per WP:BLP and other policies. Please do not reinsert this.--Die4Dixie (talk) 00:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Die4Dixie, (although I did not insert the wording you object to) I believe "custody" might be a matter of semantics. According to the CIA debriefing of Félix Rodríguez on June 3, 1975 - pg 4 states that Rodríguez was acting in the capacity as the "highest ranking Bolivian officer" on the scene where Che was being held captive, and Rodríguez admits to pg 5 ultimately passing on the final execution order to the man who killed Guevara. I am not sure why you particularly object to the phraseology - but yes agree with you in part that the wording of "custody" is not preferable to other alternatives.   Redthoreau/font> (talk)RT 00:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Let´s stick to what the source says if we are claiming to quote it. It is dishonest to say a source says something it doesn´t , and sourcs shouldn´t be used falsely to insert OR. I am glad that we agree on this issue, and am gratified that you took the time to read it too.--Die4Dixie (talk) 01:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Internal links to National Security Archive etc.[edit]

I added these internal links after going to the external links listed here and in related articles. I don't want to disrupt the current discussion, so if my edits are incorrect, please revert or correct. Thanks. Flowanda | Talk 03:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks sound to me. Thank you. No one owns it, annd any help improving it is always appreciated.--Die4Dixie (talk) 21:45, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Dictator/president[edit]

Why the insistence on referring to Trujillo as "president" rather than "dictator"? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Die4Dixie? Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 13:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.serendipity.li/cia/operation_phoenix.htm
    Triggered by \bserendipity\.li\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 16:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Personal life[edit]

Most historical figures or famous people have some blurb about their personal life. Has no one been interested in adding this, or is it specifically left out? I came here after reading this article about Mexican cartels https://medium.com/matter/blood-on-the-corn-part-ii-b4f447d70a8c part of which describes the relationship between the cartels and the contras and includes references to Rodríguez. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slippyshoe (talkcontribs) 22:07, 18 November 2014‎ (UTC)

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Go for it. - Location (talk) 23:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hector Berrellez and Leyenda[edit]

I don't want to edit anything on this until I find better sources or have a better idea of what's going on, but there has been tons of articles popping up about Rodriquez's involvement with the murder in this case. LA Weekly just did a piece on it which can be read here. I was wondering why there wasn't anything in the talk page concerning at least the allegations. Can someone enlighten me? Craigstealsheep (talk) 21:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

According to the link you provided, the allegation that Rodríguez murdered Kiki Camarena originates with an informant named René López Romero then reiterated by Hector Berrellez. I think this allegation needs to be reported on by something more substantial than the LA Weekly before its inclusion is considered. I will be interested in what you find. - Location (talk) 00:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I found a few more sources, but they're not the best. The story sounds like a movie and is really wild, but I guess if it sounds too much like a movie, it's probably made up. My question is that if these three guys made it all up, why? Why would they want to tarnish him? Here's a few more links I found. From Progreso Weeklywhich is translated from the Spanish newspaper El País and the Mexican magazine Proceso, and a story from Fox News that has details as well. Felix isn't named in the story, but they do say a "A Cuban, who worked as a CIA operative who helped run guns and drugs for the Contras," so it's not crazy to think who the mean. Of course, none of this is corroborated by any other sources besides the three people who claim it to be him. Just thought this should go on the talk page now to see if there's any further developments later. Craigstealsheep (talk) 01:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I understand. By the way, I did see the Fox News article earlier. Be skeptical of anything claimed by Tosh Plumlee. - Location (talk) 02:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Félix Rodríguez (soldier). 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}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Félix Rodríguez (soldier). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 6 January 2017 (UTC)