Talk:Pat Tillman

Proper sourcing and verbiage for section "Cover-up surrounding Tillman's death"

In the section "Cover-up surrounding Tillman's death" in the final paragraph, the following statement is made:

The destruction of evidence linked to Tillman's death, including his personal journal, led his mother to speculate that he was assassinated. General Wesley Clark agreed that it was "very possible."

The above wording indicates that Clark thought 'assassination' was possible, whereas in the actual interview, neither he nor Keith Olbermann mention the word or imply assassination... instead they use 'murder' and 'homicide.' The wording used here must be very deliberate, since paraphrasing with the word 'assassination' begets a very specific accusation. I.E. murder simply implies deliberate 'fragging' by one or more members of Tillman's own unit, whereas assassination denotes premeditated conspiratorial involvement at a much higher level. Thus either the word 'murder' or 'homicide' should be used instead, and the mention of this interview with clark should emphasize that Clark believed that a thorough and professional investigation should have specifically ruled murder out.

Additionally, I recommend the following two sources be used for that paragraph instead of the current sources:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19997327/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecTUO3IKebY

You'll notice that the first is the actual transcript of the MSNBC interview, not a second hand news source quoting GEN Clark out of context. The second is a YouTube clip of the actual interview provided because the MSNBC transcript incorrectly begins labeling Clarks answers to Keith Olbermann's questions as: "WOLFFE." The second link clears up this clerical error by MSNBC and demonstrates that Clark, and not Wolffe is responsible for that quote. —Signed by OTS

That top link took me to updated 7/27/2007 12:56:27 PM ET Guests: Will Bunch, J.K. Rowling. Do you have a good link? Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

GoergeLouis. The interview in question is on the second page of that transcript. You must click on the above link, then click on 'show more text' at the bottom of the page. The transcript of the applicable interview is roughly 2/3 the way down the page. Signed by OTS

Well, we are getting into Original Research when we have to do all that. You have done a good job in uncovering it, but Wikipedia is not the place for it. See Wikipedia:NOR#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources. You might try Wikisource at http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page. See if you can find some wp:reliable source that makes the same point you want to make. That's my advice, anyway, though others might disagree. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that transcript would be copyrighted, so it's doubtful that Wiiksource is the place for it either. GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

This is not original research, but simply a reputable video news source (MSNBC) in transcript format. It is the actual interview with GEN Clark which is quoted in the end of the 'cover-up' section, but is done so in a misleading way. Using the original transcript of the interview will avoid 2nd or 3rd hand hearsay, but most importantly, it will more accurately depict the spirit and context of the interview from which this quote originates. In essence, it would obviate the necessity to replace 'assassinate' with 'murder.' Signed by OTS

If you feel strongly enough about it, you can add the information yourself and see what happens. It will either be (1) undone by another user or (2) left alone or (3) edited and changed to reflect consensus. In any event, there will be no change until you make it. You should probably register as a user, with a user name, etc., but of course you don't have to. It's just that many people automatically discount material that is added by an unregistered editor: Unfortunate, but true. There is a message for you on your Discussion Page that tells how to do this. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you GeorgeLouis. I am by no means an expert in Wikipedia, and stumbled upon the inaccuracies in this section after reading John Krakauer's book. Though I've tried to register an account name, I was not able to receive one. This is the first Wikipedia contribution, and probably my last.... So I will now change the word assassination to murder, and add the transcript of the General Clark interview. Signed by OTS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.168.127 (talk) 11:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

disputed source/claim

The article incorrectly states that the M249 has a significantly higher rate of fire than the M16, which is not true, besides the fact that the M4 carbine has been standard for quite some time. Efcmagnew (talk) 05:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

No, it doesn't say that. It says it is capable of greater accuracy during higher rates of fire - not that it is faster, but that it is more accurate at high rates. That's not the same thing.

The statement has what appears to be a reliable source to support it.

If you wish to add clarification or amend it, with an appropriate reliable source, please go ahead - or make a suggestion here. But we do need references.  Chzz  ►  08:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Tackles

There are two sources of stats in the infobox. One say 92 tackles, the other 230. A recent edit has changed the number to 238 which seems unsourced but I'm afraid I don't know enough to decide between these two figures. Please can someone sort this out, perhaps put an inline ref next to the source for the correct figure? Thanks. --Mirokado (talk) 21:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Synopsis is incorrect

At the very top of the article, it is stated Tillman completed multiple tours before being killed. Later you say he was killed DURING his second tour. One or the other is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenfo 0 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, ref 2 says "Tillman served in several tours of duty, including time in Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom as well as a stay in Afghanistan to serve in Operation Enduring Freedom." The article could perhaps be clearer either in wording or which references it uses to support the content in that respect. Something interesting for you to sort out if you wish... --Mirokado (talk) 23:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Where was he born?

There is an inconsistency in this article, the second paragraph says he was born in San Jose, CA but the sidebar says Fremont, CA. 208.54.5.165 (talk) 07:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Rank

OK so if was posthumously promoted to corporal from specialist, should the pictures of him alive be labelled "corporal" or "specialist"? The DOD reports cited in the article consistently refer to him as "specialist". --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:40, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Does this alleviate the concern over any confusion that might take place as to his rank and the photograph? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 18:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

That edit is both simple and elegant; works for me. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 19:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)