Jump to content

Talk:John Ashcroft: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
John Ashcroft is a fucking asshole
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
Bots
7,152,379 edits
 
(140 intermediate revisions by 80 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talkheader}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|listas=Ashcroft, John|
{{WikiProject Biography|musician-work-group=yes|musician-priority=}}
{{WikiProject Illinois|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Chicago|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Missouri|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low|USgovernors=yes|USgovernors-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=low|charismatic-christianity=yes|charismatic christianity-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject U.S. Congress|subject=person|importance=low}}
}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:John Ashcroft/Archive index
|mask=Talk:John Ashcroft/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
<!-- Metadata: see [[User:MiszaBot I]] -->
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|minthreadsleft = 10
|algo = old(20d)
|archive = Talk:John Ashcroft/Archive %(counter)d
}}


== Merge proposal: [[The Ashcroft Group]] to John Ashcroft ==
==Top==
People, this should be an enclycopedia, not a political site. People quote from this website! It should be from a neutral perspective!
---


The Ashcroft Group has beent agged for notability for 7 years, but could be a valuable section here. [[User:Boleyn|Boleyn]] ([[User talk:Boleyn|talk]]) 14:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
note to self (or anyone else who gets the chance to look this up before I do): the [[Operation TIPS]] page says that the U.S. post office is now considering participating in spite of having balked originally. Verify. [[User:Koyaanis Qatsi|--KQ]]
:I've gone ahead and made the redirect since nobody objected. It made sense since that page was a stub and it seems to fit better here. [[User:FuriouslySerene|FuriouslySerene]] ([[User talk:FuriouslySerene|talk]]) 18:03, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
note to self: you forget a lot, don't you? [[User:Koyaanis Qatsi|--KQ]]


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
here's [http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1097/ijge/gj-7.htm this delicious link] for anyone with a keen sense of irony. [[User:Koyaanis Qa
tsi|--KQ]]
* LOL [[User:erzengel]] 15 Apr 03


I have just added archive links to {{plural:3|one external link|3 external links}} on [[John Ashcroft]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=677934328 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
----
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150713143406/http://www.lawteam.com/our-team/evan-fetterman/ to http://www.lawteam.com/our-team/evan-fetterman/
Should a link to [[Ashcroftism]] be put here? It's currently an orphan.- [[User:Crenner|Crenner]] 02:31 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081027164557/http://www.cnn.com:80/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/09/cabinet.resignations/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/09/cabinet.resignations/index.html
----
{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
The end of paragraph 4 under [[John Ashcroft#U.S. Attorney General|U.S. Attorney General]] has an unlinked citation. There's no indication of where it's intended to go.
----
Is the "personal quotes" section necessary? Esp. given the content, it seems like just a way to smear Ashcroft. Moreover, we don't have a comparable section for other famous people, e.g. [[George W. Bush]], [[Al Gore]], or [[Janet Reno]]. I will remove it on Tuesday (2 days from now) if nobody objects. [[User:Meelar|Meelar]] 04:16, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Maybe link it to [[Wikiquote]], like [[George W. Bush]]'s Page is? If no one minds, I shall do so in a few days.
[[User:NerdOfTheNorth|NerdOfTheNorth]] July 27, 2004
----
To point out that most people in govt. disagree with some laws is to miss the specific nature of the criticism of Ashcroft--disagreement with abortion laws is more contentious than most subjects. Also, the criticism is not necessarily due to his religion. I have no problems with John Ashcroft's religion; it's his views on abortion that give me the willies. All this means I'm reverting. [[User:Meelar|Meelar]] 20:28, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)


== Resignation ==


*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120220000917/http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/050306/guns.html to http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/050306/guns.html
John Aschroft resigned on November 2, confirmed on November 9. But so will all of Bush's Cabinet members. Is Ashcorft's permanent (yet?)? How should it be worded in the article? We seem to have a quasi-revert war. --[[User:Whosyourjudas|Whosyourjudas]] [[User talk:Whosyourjudas|(talk)]] 00:54, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
:Permanent. --[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 21:27, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
::Yes. Never mind now, apparently. --[[User:Whosyourjudas|Whosyourjudas]] [[User talk:Whosyourjudas|(talk)]] 21:46, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
Ashcroft is still technically the Attorney General. He's announced his resignation, and a replacement has been nominated, but he hasn't yet left the position of AG. According the White House, he'll stay on until a replacement is confirmed [http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimests/20041110/ts_latimes/ashcroftcommercechiefevansresignfromcabinet]. And the [http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/index.html Justice Department] website still lists him as AG. Until he actually leaves the office, the article should say that Ashcroft "is" the AG, not "was". - [[User:Walkiped|Walkiped]] 21:09, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=failed}}
==Record as Attorney General==
there is very little on what ashcroft actually ''did'' as Attorney General so far. --[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 21:27, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Cheers. —[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 12:21, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== The "moderate/dead skunk" quote ==


== Joseph Massino ==
I don't think this has any historical relevance to anything. Sorry to not have a sense of humor about it, but hey, that's life...


<nowiki>One of [[John Ashcroft]]'s final acts as Attorney General was to order federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty for Massino.<ref>{{cite news|last=Glaberson|first=William|title=Judge Objects to Ashcroft Bid for a Mobster's Execution|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/nyregion/13mob.html?ref=roslynnrmauskopf&pagewanted=print&position=|accessdate=2012-04-21|newspaper=The New York Times|date=2004-11-13}}</ref></nowiki> [[User:The Quixotic Potato|The Quixotic Potato]] ([[User talk:The Quixotic Potato|talk]]) 15:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
== Compare the Ashcroft article to the Janet Reno article ==


== Duplication of "curtain" info ==
It seems that the tenor of the Ashcroft article is much more critical & tongue in cheek than the Reno article. In the Reno article there is only casual mention of the two most disconcerting events ever foisted upon the American people by a sitting Attorney General, the Koresh compound slaughter, and the Elian Gonzalez debacle. --[[User:Spacebuffalo|spacebuffalo]] 12:58, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The information re the curtain being drawn in front of two statues (Spirit of Justice, a female, and the male Majesty of Justice) occurs in two sections of this entry.
It is more fully covered in the section "Political Issues" than in "As U.S. Attorney General." I was planning to eliminate the less detailed version but felt someone might have a reason it should be mentioned twice (?)
[[User:JeanEva Rose|JeanEva Rose]] ([[User talk:JeanEva Rose|talk]]) 21:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
: Well done, thank you. [[Special:Contributions/2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F|2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F]] ([[User talk:2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F|talk]]) 05:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
Um… [[Palmer Raids]]? [[User:Carpeicthus|Carpeicthus]] 03:56, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
== Anointing with oil ==


I have just modified 4 external links on [[John Ashcroft]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=776909475 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
[[User:Gzornenplatz|Gzornenplatz]] added the following line:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090523090051/http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/01/16/hearings/print.html to http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/01/16/hearings/print.html
:''Whenever he was sworn in to any political office, he had himself [[anointing|anointed]] with [[cooking oil]].''
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120418111431/http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/07/senate.missouri/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/07/senate.missouri/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080615012748/http://sopr.senate.gov/ to http://sopr.senate.gov/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110516205806/http://www.whitehouse.org/media/ashcroft-bacon/ to http://www.whitehouse.org/media/ashcroft-bacon/


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
I modified it to read:
:''Whenever he was sworn in to any political office, he had himself [[Anointing|anointed with oil]].''


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
I used the edit summary, "[[Cooking oil]] link serves no purpose."


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 02:23, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Gzornenplatz reverted, with the edit summary, "Well, it was cooking oil."


== External links modified ==
How do you think it should read? [[User:TacoDeposit|Taco Deposit]] | [[User_talk:TacoDeposit|Talk-o Deposit]] 15:02, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
: I don't see the type of oil used as relevant. The fact that he had himself annointed is the relevant fact. The only purpose I see to saying "cooking oil" instead of just "oil" would be to attempt to ridicule the annointing. I think it would be better NPOV to simply mention the annointing and let people accept or ridicule it as they wish. [[User:Kenj0418|Kenj0418]] 00:40, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)


I have just modified one external link on [[John Ashcroft]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/812297632|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
: Someone unnamed has put the "cooking" back. I'm reverting to TacoDeposit's last edit. Does anyone else have an opinion on the relevance of "cooking oil" vs. "oil". I don't see how it maters whether he used [[Chrism]], [[cooking oil]], or [[motor oil]]. The relevant fact is the annointing itself - and that it implies that he see's his public office as a part of a religious duty. [[User:Kenj0418|Kenj0418]] 22:21, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070311114121/http://www.whitehouse.org/media/ashcroft-bacon/index.asp to http://www.whitehouse.org/media/ashcroft-bacon/index.asp


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
:: I have removed the "cooking" again. Though I think it is completely irrelevant to the article, I would would be interested in evidence that it was cooking oil ''every'' time. Of course the chrism used by sacramental church is typically olive-oil based, which is used in cooking as well. Perhaps every article that deals with anointing should changed to refer to cooking oil. [[User:Holford|Holford]] 4 July 2005 03:19 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
I would be surprised if it were cooking oil. To be specific, it is usually olive oil that has been blessed.


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 03:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
:I agree with Kenj0418. Chances are it was probably olive oil, and if someone can verify that then by all means insert the word "olive". &ndash; [[User:Smyth|Smyth]]\<sup><font color="gray">[[User_talk:Smyth|talk]]</font></sup> 21:50, 24 July 2005 (UTC)


== bad ==
==Musican Category==
It might be just me but the musican categories strike me as out of place. Despite his musical activity he clearly an amateur (I don’t mean that as a knock). The musican categories are really only meant for professional musican or people who meet Notability for their musical activities-not for hobbiest, no matter how famous otherwise. Does anybody have any thoughts? [[User:Grey Wanderer|Grey Wanderer]] ([[User talk:Grey Wanderer|talk]]) 05:41, 6 February 2019 (UTC)


:Personally would not call this guy a musician. Or a "musican." [[User:Sharptictack|Sharptictack]] ([[User talk:Sharptictack|talk]]) 22:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
you guys cannot cite an op/ed piece as a reference.


== Ashcroft's Changing Position ==
== Second paragraph ==


"He has written several books about political and ethic." This doesn't make sense. Please fix. [[Special:Contributions/108.226.82.214|108.226.82.214]] ([[User talk:108.226.82.214|talk]]) 04:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
This was blogged on kottke.org some time ago. I think this is very much worthy of mention. Anyone want to incorporate this? Before - http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1097/ijge/gj-7.htm
and after - http://news.com.com/2010-1071_3-983921.html


==Issues with correspondence between stated sources and content==
==Neutrality==
See edit summary just before time stamp of this Talk entry. I checked one of several paragraphs in one section, and found repeated violations of WP:VERIFY. Earlier references to "pancreatitis", Stellar Wind, "semi-conscious"-ness, and phone call to security detail (¶4, earlier and closing sentences) were not found in the appearing end-of-paragraph source. (Oddly, the source was placed after the last sentence, which in particular was also not verifiable at that source!) Likely, this fast-and-loose approach was used elsewhere, so I would recommend a top-down check of sources here. Cheers. [[Special:Contributions/2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F|2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F]] ([[User talk:2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F|talk]]) 05:49, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


== Not notable as Songwriter/Musician ==
I have removed a number of POV references in this article. And while it's a great pastime painting Attorneys-General as the Great Satan, be it Reno or Ashcroft, it doesn't make a neutral article and that is the point. [[User:Libertas|Libertas]]


TL/DR - he is not known for being either a songwriter or musician, so why is songwriter in the lead sentence and the page in a musicians category? Removing songwriter from lead sentence, any views on musician category?
== Cooking oil ==


This guy has written and recorded a few songs but it is not something he is known for at all. His musical activities do not even have their own section in this page, it makes up a couple of lines in his personal life section. While notable enough for inclusion in the article, to mention it in the lead section is clearly [[WP:UNDUE]]. Without his political career, his music work alone would unlikely make him noteable enough for his own page - it is little more than [[Wikipedia:Trivia section|WP:TRIVIA]]. [[User:John wiki|John wiki]]: [[User talk:John wiki|If you have a problem, don't mess with my puppy...]] 17:53, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
I have posted the question of the cooking oil on [[Wikipedia:Requests for Comment|RfC]]. [[User:TacoDeposit|Taco Deposit]] | [[User_talk:TacoDeposit|Talk-o to Taco]] 22:32, July 15, 2005 (UTC)


:I saw the request for comment, and here is my comment: I have some experience with the practice of anointing folks with oil (in both Christian and non-Christian contexts), and the act and its symbolism is what matters, not what type of oil was used. If it were up to me I would leave it out altogether, as it's not at all relevant. It also came across to me as sort of a subtle dig at him and his religion (that was my first impression). Oh, and for what it's worth, here is my POV: I don't much care for Mr. Ashcroft or Christianity, but I do care about religious symbolism and how it's presented. Hope I wasn't too long-winded here. [[User:KathL|KathL]] 07:21, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

::The Crisco anointing is an undoubted (he himself wrote it in his autobiography) and widely-reported fact which is just a typical example of many things which, taken together, make many people think he's a wacko. As such it is relevant, and, since the article just states the facts, anyone is still free to decide for himself if he's a wacko or not. If you think there's nothing strange with his behaviour, how can you see it as a dig? There are some people who, because they personally like him (or because they're just partisan), want to manipulate others by removing things which they know others will see as wacky. That's not acceptable. If the article is factual and you think it makes him look like a wacko, then that's maybe because he ''is'' a wacko. [[User:NoPuzzleStranger|NoPuzzleStranger]] 08:26, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

:::Please provide citations for verifiability. As Ashcroft was probably not being annointed for baking purposes, if you are going to mention the annointment and the choice of oil, you should be encyclopaedic and make the additional effort to explain why he chose to be annointed in the first place and what sacred status the oil used would have under Ashcroft's denominational or personal religious views. Saying that some people think he's a "wacko" on account of this without attempting to explain how this may make sense to Ashcroft is obscurantism employed to make an editorial point. I agree with KathL that referencing a religious act as carried out with a seemingly profane material and then saying that these are the facts is insufficient and lends itself to interpretation according to predispositions which one ought to challenge with some greater burden of fact established by research. If you're going to raise, please explicate it to indicate the larger reasoning. [[User:Buffyg|Buffyg]] 23:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

::::Here's a quote from the Omaha World Herald, January 16th, 2001, describing the episode in John Ashcroft's book, with quotes:

::::Describing the night before he became a senator, Ashcroft said his two gubernatorial inaugurations had been like those of the Jewish kings David and Saul, who "were anointed as they undertook their administrative duties." He remarked to family and friends, "It's too bad we don't have any oil." "Let's see if there's something in the kitchen," his father suggested. Someone brought out a tiny bowl of Crisco oil. "We chuckled about that, but my father assured us, 'The oil itself isn't important, except as a symbol of the spirit of God,'" Ashcroft wrote.

::::There are several other reputable news sources referring to the same thing on LexisNexis. [[User:Jamesmusik|James]] 17:00, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

'''rfc comment''' - [[holy oil]] is just cooking oil that's been consecrated. The comment would be clearer if it gave marginally more context, eg said "on one occasion he used ..." (assuming it only happened once). And it would be nice to know (and note in the article) whether this anointing thing is an Ashcroft peculiarity or something his [[Assembly of God]] church advocates. Finally, putting a reference in a footnote would be good, if it's not available online. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 20:49, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

'''rfc comment''' cooking oil is relavent. If he was annointed with [[holy oil]], it is different than if he were anointed with [[lard]], [[tallow]], or [[ghee]] (which would be very Hindu). Leave the reference to cooking oil in. [[User:Klonimus|Klonimus]] 01:23, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

:'''rfc comment''' If he's using oil that is not consistent with the doctrines of his religion, it is very relevant and appropriate to mention. Putting in the quote from the article where he states that it's the symbolism that he's after would be appropriate, and would make it seem less weird. Also, this is a very good place for either a footnote to cite a reference, or an inline reference. [[User:Unfocused|<FONT COLOR="#66CCFF">Un</FONT>]][[User talk:Unfocused|<FONT COLOR="#0000CC">focused</FONT>]] 07:29, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

== Christian fundamentalism ==

I disagree that it is not NPOV to add this article to [[:Category:Christian fundamentalism]]. If it is, the category should be deleted in its entirety. [[User:Jamesmusik|James]] 22:36, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

:Do you think that Ashcroft himself and his supporters like to call themselves "fundamentalists"? Do you see that as a neutral term? /[[User:Jebur|Jebur]] 04:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

::Fundamentalism is merely another word for extreme conservatism, to the point that one is more conservative than the establishment, which obviously applies in this case. Ashcroft would disaprove of being called a fundamentalist, merely because he likes to use the word pejoratively against a large section of "Islamic fundamentalists" he'd like to see disappear. "Fundamentalist radical," on the other hand, is not neutral. [[User:Jamesmusik|James]] 06:33, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

:::"Ashcroft would disaprove of being called a fundamentalist" - that's right, and therefor wikipedia shouldn't call him that either. /[[User:Jebur|Jebur]] 02:59, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

== 2000 Senate race? ==

A question I always had, and maybe the article can address it, is how did John Ashcroft lose his Senate reelection? In other words, Mel Carnahan’s name won (Ashcroft stopped campaigning out of respect for his deceased opponent and there was a great sympathy vote from the Missouri electorate for their governor) but by what right did Carnahan’s wife take the seat and why did Ashcroft not contest it?

In other words, what if Mel Carnahan’s chief of staff wanted his position? Could she have taken it? Or, what about the man’s cousin? Why didn’t he get sworn in as the Senator from Missouri?

It’s not up to a given individual to decide that the seat is theirs. There has to be some protocol in place to determine who becomes Senator in that instance.

Was there a court case?

[[User:Eagle in NYC|Eagle in NYC]] 10:28, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

:As is the case in many states, the governor appoints a replacement until a special election can be held. When Mel Carnahan died, Lt Gov Roger Wilson became governor and said that if Mel won the election, he would appoint Jean. [[User:Holford|Holford]] 12:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

:Edited to reflect this information [[User:209.145.162.130|209.145.162.130]] 21:20, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

== John Ashcroft is a fucking asshole ==

I think this needs to be mentioned in the article somewhere.

Latest revision as of 01:46, 12 November 2024

Merge proposal: The Ashcroft Group to John Ashcroft

[edit]

The Ashcroft Group has beent agged for notability for 7 years, but could be a valuable section here. Boleyn (talk) 14:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and made the redirect since nobody objected. It made sense since that page was a stub and it seems to fit better here. FuriouslySerene (talk) 18:03, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on John Ashcroft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:21, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Massino

[edit]

One of [[John Ashcroft]]'s final acts as Attorney General was to order federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty for Massino.<ref>{{cite news|last=Glaberson|first=William|title=Judge Objects to Ashcroft Bid for a Mobster's Execution|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/nyregion/13mob.html?ref=roslynnrmauskopf&pagewanted=print&position=|accessdate=2012-04-21|newspaper=The New York Times|date=2004-11-13}}</ref> The Quixotic Potato (talk) 15:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication of "curtain" info

[edit]

The information re the curtain being drawn in front of two statues (Spirit of Justice, a female, and the male Majesty of Justice) occurs in two sections of this entry. It is more fully covered in the section "Political Issues" than in "As U.S. Attorney General." I was planning to eliminate the less detailed version but felt someone might have a reason it should be mentioned twice (?) JeanEva Rose (talk) 21:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, thank you. 2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F (talk) 05:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John Ashcroft. 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.

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) 02:23, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Ashcroft. 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.

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) 03:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Musican Category

[edit]

It might be just me but the musican categories strike me as out of place. Despite his musical activity he clearly an amateur (I don’t mean that as a knock). The musican categories are really only meant for professional musican or people who meet Notability for their musical activities-not for hobbiest, no matter how famous otherwise. Does anybody have any thoughts? Grey Wanderer (talk) 05:41, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally would not call this guy a musician. Or a "musican." Sharptictack (talk) 22:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second paragraph

[edit]

"He has written several books about political and ethic." This doesn't make sense. Please fix. 108.226.82.214 (talk) 04:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with correspondence between stated sources and content

[edit]

See edit summary just before time stamp of this Talk entry. I checked one of several paragraphs in one section, and found repeated violations of WP:VERIFY. Earlier references to "pancreatitis", Stellar Wind, "semi-conscious"-ness, and phone call to security detail (¶4, earlier and closing sentences) were not found in the appearing end-of-paragraph source. (Oddly, the source was placed after the last sentence, which in particular was also not verifiable at that source!) Likely, this fast-and-loose approach was used elsewhere, so I would recommend a top-down check of sources here. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:B160:B273:E4A3:8B0F (talk) 05:49, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable as Songwriter/Musician

[edit]

TL/DR - he is not known for being either a songwriter or musician, so why is songwriter in the lead sentence and the page in a musicians category? Removing songwriter from lead sentence, any views on musician category?

This guy has written and recorded a few songs but it is not something he is known for at all. His musical activities do not even have their own section in this page, it makes up a couple of lines in his personal life section. While notable enough for inclusion in the article, to mention it in the lead section is clearly WP:UNDUE. Without his political career, his music work alone would unlikely make him noteable enough for his own page - it is little more than WP:TRIVIA. John wiki: If you have a problem, don't mess with my puppy... 17:53, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Ashcroft&oldid=1256886932"