Talk:John McCain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Q1:Why doesn't this article use a better picture of McCain at the top?

A1:The portrait of McCain at the top of the article is not set in stone, and a different picture may eventually be used instead. However, there has been consensus that the picture at the top should be a forward-facing image in formal attire, and only a very limited number of such photos of McCain are publicly available without copyright restrictions.


Q2:Why does this article cover up the fact that McCain has called Asians "gooks" and made other similar remarks?

A2:Nothing is being covered up. This article is written according to summary style which requires that material in other articles is only summarized here in this article. The information about McCain's use of the term "gook" is discussed in the articles on John McCain presidential campaign, 2000 and Cultural and political image of John McCain. Many other controversial remarks by McCain are detailed in the latter article. The "gook" comment was narrowly used by McCain with reference to the specific people who captured and then tortured him in Vietnam; McCain stopped using the term in 2000, and many Asians did not mind him narrowly using the term in the way he did. Singling out this remark for inclusion in this article would give it undue weight, and providing the necessary background and context would also take up too much space in this article. This issue was previously discussed in March, May, and June of 2008.


Q3: Where is X? It is a well-known development in McCain's life.

A3: As stated above, this article uses summary style; think of it as an executive summary of McCain. Much more information about McCain's life, military career, political career, and persona is included in the McCain biographical subarticles shown in the navigational box: Early life and military career of John McCain, House and Senate career of John McCain, 1982–1999, John McCain presidential campaign, 2000, Senate career of John McCain, 2001–present, John McCain presidential campaign, 2008, and Cultural and political image of John McCain.


Q4: Which of these is the subarticle that lists his controversies?

A4: None of them. All such material (such as his role in the Keating Five, for example) is included in the normal biographical sections they occur in, in this article and in the various subarticles. Having a separate "controversies" or "criticisms" article or section is considered a violation of WP:NPOV, WP:Content forking, and WP:Criticism. A special effort was undertaken to rid all 2008 presidential candidates' articles of such treatment — see here.


Q5: This article is not neutral! It's biased {for, against} him! It reads like it was written by {his PR team, Democratic hatchet men}!

A5: Complaints of bias are taken seriously, but must be accompanied by very specific areas of concern or suggestions for change. Vague, general statements such as these are of no help to editors; we can't read your mind.


Q6: The section on his presidential campaign leaves out important recent developments. What gives?

A6: The main article's presidential campaign section is intentionally brief. The subarticle John McCain presidential campaign, 2008 has a much fuller treatment of the campaign and that is where most new additions should go.


Q7: Something in the lead (introductory) section doesn't have a footnote. I'm going to put a {{fact}} tag on it right now.

A7: This article (like many others) uses the approach that there are no citations in the lead section, because everything in the lead is also found in the body of the article along with its citation.

Featured article John McCain is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 4, 2008.
This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:


Too many categories[edit]

McCain is in too many categories. We should start by removing him from non-US awards categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Is this your own idiosyncratic view of the category system, or is there some WP-wide purge of non-essential categories going on? If the latter, please point to the consensus discussion behind it. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Marital infidelity mention with regards to his public image is unreliably sourced[edit]

In the second line of the "Cultural and political image", it mentions John McCain's "marital infidelity" as part of "this image" as in his public image. This is sourced to a Blogspot blog, which I'm sure we all agree is an unreliable source as per WP:RS. Thus, the source should be changed or the sourced phrase removed. 211.31.192.182 (talk) 09:02, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

You are right – I lost track of this on my watchlist when it came in. I have removed it. McCain's infidelities during his first marriage and the effect it had on his family are already mentioned in the "Commanding officer, liaison to Senate, and second marriage" section, but for whatever reason, those actions have not become a significant part of his image as a politician. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Arizona GOP censures McCain for 'liberal' record[edit]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/arizona-gop-censures-mccain-liberal-record

Is the action of the state party bigwigs notable enough to mention? Hcobb (talk) 02:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, I hadn't seen it. I think the censure probably tells us more about the state party than it does about McCain, but it does illustrate that his 2009–10 swing is over and that, unless he does a repeat, he might be in trouble in 2016 should he decide to run again. So I've added it to this article and to the Senate career subarticle. When the 2013 ratings from the ACU and ADA come out, I'll update the chart that's here, which gives the most objective measure of changes in McCain's ideological state. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:32, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
He won the election.John Paul Parks (talk) 05:04, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Silver Star[edit]

The Silver Star is a serious medal, "awarded for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States." what did he get it for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.223.87 (talk) 13:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Silver_Star_Medal_-_John_McCain Hcobb (talk) 14:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Scotch-Irish[edit]

Dave Wagner here... Could someone please fix these "Scotch" references...? Scotch is drink, while Scottish is an ancestry. Thanks! 67.124.150.137 (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Scotch-Irish American is the base article being linked to, and the "Terminology" section there gets into the different terms that have been used. It always used to be "Scots-Irish" in this John McCain article until a couple of months ago when this edit changed it and I personally would be fine with reverting back to the prior usage. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


Correct terminology is Scots-Irish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.70.26.200 (talk) 05:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

The latest[edit]

Perhaps WTR can work this in somewhere:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYY0rzrJ7Po 173.76.59.208 (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Well now. Maybe if he busts this out a few more times we can add it to the cultural and political image subarticle. Or perhaps, per Jamie Foxx's comment, we could create a Republicans dancing in the Hamptons article. Wasted Time R (talk) 09:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps a list.63.92.232.73 (talk) 21:29, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

IS connections[edit]

Perhaps McCain's connections with several top leaders of the "Islamic State" should be mentioned here? How should this best be done and under which heading? --198.136.25.82 (talk) 06:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Since from a little unpleasant web browsing it appears the "source" for this claim is a French conspiracy theorist nutjob, the answers are no and never. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Hang on a sec, look at the YouTube video on this page: http://www.taliban-norge.no/?p=5464 Never mind the page it is on. That video is from a major, bona fide American TV network. And look the photos on that page - are they forged? The video and the photos could have fooled me. They look real.--116.192.7.42 (talk) 04:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
It is from ABC News. Is ABC News a reliable source? Ought to be. Has John McCain contested the contents of this ABC News report? Nope. That video should be an ok source.--116.192.7.42 (talk) 06:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
If you are talking about McCain's 2013 trip to visit Syrian Rebels and the accusations against two of the people he was in a photograph with, that already is in the article and has been for some time:
"Regarding the Syrian civil war that had begun in 2011, McCain repeatedly argued for the U.S. intervening militarily in the conflict on the side of the anti-government forces.[289] He staged a visit to rebel forces inside Syria in May 2013, the first senator to do so, and called for arming the Free Syrian Army with heavy weapons and for the establishment of a no-fly zone over the country.[289] Following reports that two of the people he posed for pictures with had been responsible for the kidnapping of eleven Lebanese Shiite pilgrims the year before, McCain disputed one of the identifications and said he had not met directly with the other.[290]"
If there are now claims that these two people in question are top leaders of ISIL, that would require an additional reliable source. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Visual identification of Al-Baghdadi will not do? Al-Baghdadi' face is everywhere on videos from IS. Isn't this just to satisfy ourselves that it is one and the same person on all available pictures? And Mohammad Noor, his face is very characteristic, And then all of these in the same series of photographs... I would have thought that even one clear photograph would count as a reliable source. Here we have several, _and_ a video tape, from ABC News. What else do we need?--116.192.7.42 (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
From what I read, the guys allegedly in the photo with McCain were from the Northern Storm Brigade, who opponents of ISIL in Syria, not allies. Anyway, what you need is a story published by the Washington Post or Reuters or CNN or somesuch mainstream media outlet that says what you are saying. An ABC News story would be fine, but all the one that you point to says is that McCain went to Syria and met with top rebel leaders, with nothing said at all about which groups those rebels were from. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:57, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't get it. The guy in the pictures with McCain is Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the leader (or Kalif if you want) of IS aka ISIL aka ISIS. Al-Baghdadi is not an opponent of of IS(IL), he is the _leader_ of it. I just don't get it. What more can you want. The picture is right there. You are telling me that the persons I see in the pictures and in the video are not the persons I see. I throw in the towel. I am outta here. You guys can continue to edit this any way you want. But this is ridiculous.--116.192.7.42 (talk) 03:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia has very different rules for inclusion than you are expecting. Your own personal beliefs and experiences and conclusions are irrelevant. Read WP:Verifiability carefully. Then focus on the WP:EXCEPTIONAL part of that. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I read that. Multiple mainstream sources. Hmm, ok. Would these count?

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/22/376159/isil-independent-or-ciamossad-proxy/

http://www.tehrantimes.com/oped/117859-isil-independent-regional-actor-or-cia-mossad-proxy

http://www.senzasoste.it/internazionale/il-patto-isil-usa-in-una-foto

http://www.gargalianoi.com/2014/08/13/o-φανατικοσ-του-ισλαμ-aποκάλυψη-σοκ-ο-υπ/

That is four sources saying that McCain met with Al-Baghdadi. Four mainstream news sources. Does this satisfy the criteria for inclusion you mentioned?--116.192.7.42 (talk) 23:48, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

These sources do not seem to be mainstream. - Cwobeel (talk) 00:14, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
It is obvious that there is a meme going around about that purported photo, but it is all false propaganda. - Cwobeel (talk) 00:19, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
It seems that McCain himself has contributed to circulating these photographs:

http://thetruthfulone.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/mccain-syria.jpg

So the photographs themselves are hardly forged. The issue rather seems to be, how do we identify the persons in the photographs in a way we can all agree upon. Am I right?--116.192.7.42 (talk) 01:10, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

For the sake of order, the date of that tweet is May 29, 2013. It is still visible in the tweet feed of @SenJohnMacCain - and that _is_ the Twitter account of Senator McCain, is it not? Have there been any claims of McCain's Twitter account having been compromised around that time?--116.192.7.42 (talk) 01:25, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
(ec)Not even close. Press TV is the official state broadcasting arm of the government of Iran, and they'll say anything to try and make the U.S. look bad. The Tehran Times is another government-supporting publication in Iran, and the piece in question is an op-ed, which wouldn't be usable as a source even if it was in the New York Times. The Italian piece I can't read, but I've never heard of Senza Soste; you would need a more established Italian paper like Corriere della Sera or La Repubblica or La Stampa or something like that. The Greek piece I can't read either, but I don't need to, since the page you link to is also pushing 9/11 conspiracy theories. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:27, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Tehran Times is the largest English language newspaper in Iran. Press TV is the largest English language TV channel in Iran. I am a little surprised you do not think they are mainstream news sources. Let me rephrase like this then: Does Wikipedia maintain a list of newspapers and broadcasters which it regards bona fide sources? And if there is no such list, shouldn't Wikipedia try to make one? It would save us all time and effort. Additional question, just because I am curious: Does Iran have any bona fide news sources at all (according to your criteria)?--116.192.7.42 (talk) 00:58, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
There isn't a list per se, but WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard is the place to go for these discussions. Look in the archives on that page for previous discussions about a given outlet. As for Iran, there is no freedom of the press there and virtually everything has to pass through government censorship, so no, Iranian publications are not reliable sources for this kind of thing. You will however see some articles using the Tehran Times as a source for innocuous items like football tournament results. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Just to follow up on this, this WaPo Fact Checker piece and this NYT story both dismiss as bogus and false the claims that McCain met with ISIL members during his Syria trip. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:34, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Should we mention that McCain's buddies sold American journalist Steven Sotloff to ISIS? http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/john-mccains-terrorists/ Hcobb (talk) 12:38, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Opinion piece from an opinion publication that pushes non-intervention. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Source seems to be Barak Barfi. http://jpupdates.com/2014/09/23/heated-dispute-details-sotloff-abduction-raises-questions-obama-syria-policy/ Hcobb (talk) 15:25, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── This is also reported by The Daily Beast (here) and elsewhere. However, The Daily Mail has published an article headlined White House says beheaded American journalist Steven Sotloff was not 'sold' to ISIS as family friend claims; similar articles have probably been published by other sources.
The answer to the question, "Should we mention that McCain's buddies sold American journalist Steven Sotloff to ISIS?" is "No, we should not." However, we should publish significant information about what reliable secondary sources are publishing about the topic of this article. The significance of comments about this particular point is a matter to be decided by editorial consensus here, hopefully keeping WP:NPOV and WP:NOTNEWS in mind. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:13, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Just noted McCain's own response, as he's likely to be a RS for his own positions. Hcobb (talk) 00:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Just because McCain has denied something doesn't mean we should include it here. People in the public eye are forced to deny all sorts of allegations all the time. You (Hcobb) used a Newsmax source for your addition in the article itself, but Newsmax is generally marginal at best as a source. In addition, your edit was slanted as it failed to include Kerry's denial, which even the Newsmax story included. As for two of your other sources, the American Conservative is no good at all and jpupdates is some kind of obscure website that also has no value here. The Daily Beast is the closest thing to a mainstream source you've got. But in my view this story hasn't gotten sufficient media attention to warrant inclusion in this main article, especially given its 'guilt by association' BLP implications. I think your change should be removed. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

His meeting with Syrian rebels is fact that he himself tweeted. https://twitter.com/SenJohnMcCain/status/339455679800700928/photo/1 so the rebels included the now ISIS leader. May be he did not know that some of the rebels will create ISIS then. But it is a fact that he met these rebels that included current ISIS leader. That fact need to be included in this page. [ 02:13, November 19, 2014‎ 117.208.216.255]

Yes, he met with Syrian rebels. No, he did not meet with ISIL leaders, current or future. See this WaPo Fact Checker piece and this NYT story. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2014[edit]

Keating Five text uses word "largely" to describe the charges being dismissed. There are plenty of reliable sources that discuss the ramifications of Charles Keating's crimes and impact on our society. People's lives were devastated and he was aided by a group of politicians who received a slap on the wrist, including McCain. To leave out the controversy surrounding that is to white wash history.

TheyCallHimHollywood (talk) 14:06, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Not done: you have not made it clear exactly what you want done. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 15:31, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
The term "largely exonerated" refers specifically to McCain and is factually accurate. The story was somewhat different for three of the other senators, especially Cranston. The Keating Five article contains details about the outcome with respect to all five of them, and the "Reactions" section of that article describes how some people thought the senators got off too lightly. The Charles Keating article contains details about that person's actions and the effect it had on people's lives, as do to some extent the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association and Savings and loan crisis articles. Since McCain was largely exonerated, those four other articles are more appropriate places to describe the effects of Keating's actions than this McCain article. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

TV/movie section[edit]

Just wondering why there is no section about his cameos in TV and movies? McCain appeared as himself was in two episodes of Parks and Recreation, in 24 and also was in Wedding Crashers. I think this is definitely notable. He has so many related articles - where should this go? Thanks. МандичкаYO 😜 05:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Gallery[edit]

I put back the old gallery because I prefer the caption below rather than above, and in plain text rather than bold. Also, the low-res picture shows his parents and siblings which seems worthwhile.Anythingyouwant (talk) 09:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Committee Assignments[edit]

McCain's committee assignments have not been properly updated since the beginning of the current congress.

1. He no longer serves on the Foreign Relations committee.

2. He is no longer a full member of any Armed Service sub committees but as Chairman of the full committee may serve as an ex-officio member of any subcommittee.

3. He is an ex-officio member of the Intelligence committee.

Conservative Thinker (talk) 14:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I have made these changes. Thanks for pointing them out. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:54, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Notice of proposal to wrap up subarticle[edit]

Just realized I never gave notice here of Talk:Senate career of John McCain, 2001–present#Proposal to wrap up this subarticle from a week ago. There's been no reaction there; if there isn't one here, I will proceed. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:00, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic Language[edit]

In the POW section of the article, there is the phrase "and with his gray hair turned white as snow". I feel that this language is ill suited to wikipedia, perhaps more suited to a biography. According to the guidelines wikipedia should be free of Puffery. User:Wasted Time R appears to disagree, he/she mentions WP:POINT but I am unsure how this applies. Smk65536 (talk) 13:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Right next to that change, you made this edit which changed "In August 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain" to "In August 1968, a program of enhanced interrogation began on McCain". That is as good an example of WP:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point as one could hope to find. And that convinced me your other edit wasn't serious either. As for "white as snow", it is sourced, but if you feel that it's too interesting for readers and that WP should always be boring to read, you can remove the "as snow", but I think the "white" should still stay. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I fully agree with Smk65536. --Thomas de Mowbray (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2016[edit]

In the Writings by McCain section, do hyperlinks to the new articles on Why Courage Matters and Thirteen Soldiers. Thank you. 2600:1001:B12B:19C5:59C6:37B6:85EB:3062 (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

2600:1001:B12B:19C5:59C6:37B6:85EB:3062 (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Done Thanks! Mz7 (talk) 04:04, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

John McCain's Military Service[edit]

Due to a prominent urban legand about Senator McCain, it may be wise to mention the [USS Fortestal Incident] in which his aircraft was severely damaged by an electrical malfunction on an F-4B Phantom II Fighter Jet on the flight deck when it triggered a Mk-32 unguided rocket. The resulting fire and explosion led to two bombs becoming dislodged and "cooking off". The urban legend alledges that then- Lieutenant-Commander McCain dropped the bomb on the deck.MARINEav8r (talk) 22:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

We say here in this article that "On July 29, 1967, McCain, by then a lieutenant commander, was near the epicenter of the USS Forrestal fire. He escaped from his burning jet and was trying to help another pilot escape when a bomb exploded;[28] McCain was struck in the legs and chest by fragments.[29] The ensuing fire killed 134 sailors and took 24 hours to control.[30][31]" Do yo think we should we say more?Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Sedona[edit]

The article on Sedona, Arizona lists McCain as a notable person. However, I can find no connection between McCain and Sedona. Is that a mistake?Bill (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

It is sort of a mistake. The media has often referred to a McCain ranch (or cabin) in Sedona, but it's actually located in nearby Cornville, Arizona. On the other hand, McCain does host an annual conference in Sedona.[1].Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:42, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2017[edit]

The picture of John McCain and Kerry speaking with (Saudi Royal Family members) is not accurate. Kerry is speaking with Dr. Muhammed Al-Issa, ex-minister of justice and current secratery general of the islamic world league and McCain is speaking with Sulaiman Abalkhail, ex-minister of Islamic affairs and president of Imam Muhammed bin Saud Islamic university. Both are not members of the royal family. The picture, however, have been taking in King's palace. 84.235.83.65 (talk) 13:15, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The State Department claims it's the Saudi royal family. — Train2104 (t • c) 17:48, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Lack of clarity in Senate career[edit]

The only reason I came to this page was to find out when his current term began and when that term expires. I don't really want to tackle this whole article but do want to point out that as the place to go to find quick information that is laid out consistently, this article falls short. I'm only adding this section to point out that I'm going to search elsewhere on the Internet for this information (probably ballotpedia). If you have a vested interest in Arizona, the Senate, or McCain and would like to straighten up the shelves, they sure could use it. --SlimJimTalk 02:45, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John McCain. 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) 10:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on John McCain. 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) 04:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on John McCain. 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) 09:37, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

isis[edit]

Yes, John McCain is “directly responsible” for the rise of ISIS.

please add a proper section; just one of many sources

I don't think his political opponent is really that reliable as a source. She will say what she wants to try to win an election. ~ GB fan 19:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

McCain's appearance at the Comey hearing[edit]

I have removed, for discussion, a paragraph about McCain's comments at the Comey hearing. [2] Yes, his seemingly befuddled questions generated a lot of coverage and speculation in the press. But IMO this is a case of WP:NOTNEWS. I think all this commentary will pass as a one-day wonder. The material is too negative to include in a BLP on that basis. If the press is still talking about it a week from now, I will reconsider. --MelanieN (talk) 15:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Everything begins as News. Were NOTNEWS to be taken literally, it would require the deletion of the entire project. Items should be added when they are timely, as this is the easiest time to obtain information on them, before the memory clouds. Why not include, and then delete later, when/if it ceases to be notable (unlikely) rather than prophesizing that it will fade from notability? Mishigas (talk) 18:42, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Please read WP:BLP. Wikipedia has special rules about including negative content about living people. Such material must be well cited (which this material is), AND it must be important enough that its information value outweighs its negative value (which IMO this is not, unless it becomes a broader and more lasting story). "Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment." --MelanieN (talk) 21:44, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
@Mishigas: @MelanieN: I looked at the McCain article this evening to remind myself that he had been reelected this past November, and went down to his comments about the AHCA bill. I was surprised that there was no mention of the June 8th hearing, since it had drawn such a huge amount of coverage. Here's the URL for the transcript of that hearing, with the http, so it doesn't carry to the bottom of this page. ://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/08/full-text-james-comey-trump-russia-testimony-239295 I should add that I have often had considerable respect for McCain's courage and intellect over the years, though I have sometimes disagreed with him over various issues. I sat in the Senate Gallery over 15 years ago as McCain-Feingold was being debated, and remember how thrilled I was as he, Feingold, Boxer and Wellstone walked from desk to desk to desk, rounding up votes for passage. I thought it was a great moment in American history. That said, when I was watching Comey's testimony live on CSPAN nine days ago, I was astonished when John first clearly referred to Trump as "Comey," while he was actually questioning Comey, then moments later, as "President Comey," after which he corrected himself, I was quite alarmed. He proceeded to question Comey about the Clinton and Trump campaign investigations, and he was obviously quite confused. I was involved doing slight edits on the AHCA textual reference, so I went to review reports on his participation in the hearing. I got 285,000 hits on my query specifically about Comey, Trump, and McCain's behavior in the hearing. At that point, not realizing that it had already been discussed on this TALK page, I added a brief mention of the circumstances to the article. I came to the McCain article talk page some time afterward, after making edits to another TALK page, and discovered the prior discussion. I'm worried for him, and hope he can finish his term, but I'm also hoping he's seen a neurologist about this. He's a multiple cancer survivor, as well as having received horrible beatings while he was imprisoned, has been involved and injured in plane crashes, and he'll be 81 in October. I personally feel that the mention should stay, but its presence should be reassessed in say a month or so, to see if it remains a continuing issue. If our consensus here says otherwise, I'm comfortable with that. Activist (talk) 09:58, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm mostly retired from articles like this, and the pressure to deal with recent events such as this one is part of the reason why. Any time something happens that grabs people's attention, it will get repeated in every media outlet under the sun and you'll end up with 285,000 hits. That doesn't mean it has real importance or could pass the WP:10 year test. To me here the answer is clear: the hearings incident does not belong at this time. Yes, the man had a bad five minutes. You try talking in public and on television all day, every day, for decade after decade and see whether you sometimes have a bad five minutes. Could it possibly be evidence that a decline is underway? Hopefully not, but if so and if that becomes publicly clear at some point, this incident can then be included as the first sign that the public saw of it. Otherwise it's just a bad five minutes. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:54, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, Activist, but I removed it. This was kind of a one-day wonder as far as the coverage went. You said reassess in a month to see if it is still an issue, and I agree with that, but in the meantime IMO it is too negative and hurtful to leave in the article on the off chance that it turns out to be an important incident in his life. If it is still a big deal a month from now, we can then add something with the perspective of history. (My reaction, watching it live, was the same as yours:"Oh, this is sad!") {And BTW, user:Mishigas, who added it to the article originally and argued here for retaining it, does not count toward consensus; they turned out to be a sock of a blocked long-term abuse account.) --MelanieN (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
opinion/speculation --MelanieN (talk) 04:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
@Wasted Time R: Thanks for your response, Melanie. Since McCain's term ends in 2022, so there won't be any campaign, we quite possibly might not hear about this at all. If he had such lapses around the same time Hillary had her fainting spell, we probably would have heard about it on a daily basis, made an issue in a primary and/or general election. I suspect this may be very bad news, though, and if that's the case, it will be a great loss. Similarly, I knew Rep. Dennis Moore, for a decade or so, since his first year in Congress, in 1999. He was a very bright guy, a criminal defense and prosecuting attorney before he was elected to congress. He announced in November 2009 he would not run for reelection and his wife ran unsuccessfully to succeed him in 2010. As was with McCain, I didn't always agree with him, but I had a lot of respect for him as a public servant. In early 2012, he announced he had been diagnosed with early stage Alzheimer's which I gathered was the reason he left office at only 65 years old. There was nothing about his behavior that gave me any idea he was having problems, nor did I hear about it private. Activist (talk) 03:20, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Like you, I have always been a big admirer of McCain. Not politically, but as a human being. That's why I found it so sad to see him like that. I suspect we will not hear him making public speeches very often from now on. Mostly staff-written statements from his office I suspect. --MelanieN (talk) 04:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
@MelanieN: He could have really been extremely sleep deprived, so this was a one-off, or he could have had a mini-stroke, in which case the brain typically rewires itself. I do hope for the best. Thanks. Activist (talk) 05:47, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
You guys are jumping to fearful conclusions at this point. McCain holds the all-time record for most appearances on the Sunday morning talk shows and I don't expect him to retreat from those or anything else. For example you can see this live Facebook town hall he did just three days ago. I watched the first 16 minutes or so - he seemed fine to me. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
In any case this is all WP:FORUM. Would you all mind if I hat most of it? --MelanieN (talk) 17:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hat away! Activist (talk) 08:31, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Pray for John McCain[edit]

Off topic. Part FORUM, part CANVASSING. --MelanieN (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Please, everyone, join me in prayer for our loyal senator John McCain after his troubling performance at the Comey hearings, in which he appeared to think the hearings were about whether Hillary clinton had colluded with the Russians to hack her own campaign and help Donny Trump win. Also, please contribute over at James Comey Senate Intelligence Committee testimony and VoTE:NO at the AfD! Thanks, y'all!!!!Mishigas (talk) 18:31, 9 June 2017 (UTC)