Jump to content

Talk:Election promise

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ellsworth (talk | contribs) at 16:31, 29 April 2006 (Election promise). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

New to Election promise, hope to add some information

Hello contributors of Election promise, I hope I don't step on any toes by adding information, I don't plan on deleting or changing anything you have all written in the short term. I just got done with a nasty edit war, and some of the people suggested that I put these historical facts about lies that presidents made about troop reductions on this page. I would love to add it to another page, but the vicious edit war has hampered this.Travb 07:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The additions are good, but I worry about this page becoming too focused on the United States. - SimonP 13:51, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the compliment, I would have loved to have built my own page, but that was unfortunatly stopped. Any suggestions? If the focus issue is a big concern, maybe you can move this section to another page with an appropriate title? Any suggestions are wonderful, as I mentioned, someone else suggested that I post here. Suggestions are always welcome!Travb 14:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe split the article in two? US and canada, with a short blurb about both here at Election promise? Just an idea...tell me what you think.Travb 14:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Simon. Right now there seems to be no risk of the article become "Americanized". I had only a passing interest in the subject of election promises, and after about 6 hours of work on the subject of Nixon's promises, I have lost interest and will probably work on other topics/subjects for a a while.

I guess there is the possiblity of Election promise, or any wikisubject becoming too slanted in one direction because of a heavy focus on one subtopic. But I personally think this is something to optomistically look forward too, not be fearful off. I wish someday that some of my created pages will be overflowing with good encyclopedic content.

If this site does become to Americanized, we/you will cross that bridge when in comes. I just want you to know that I don't see adding much more to the page right now. Travb 09:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Election promise

The text is as follows:

In the 1968 Presidential elections, Richard Nixon did not use the phrase "secret plan", which originated with a reporter looking for a lead to a story summarizing the Republican candidate's (hazy) promise to end the war without losing. But neither did he disavow the term, and it soon became a part of the campaign. When pressed for details, Nixon retreated to the position that to tip his hand would interfere with the negotiations that had begun in Paris. [1]

According to one historian: "...it became obvious in 1969 that Nixon's "secret plan" to end the war was a campaign gimmick..."[2]

Another historian wrote: "Nixon never had a plan to end the war, but he did have a general strategy--to increase pressure on the communists [and] issue them a November 1, 1969 deadline to be conciliatory or else...The North Vietnamese did not respond to Nixon's ultimatum...and his aides began planning Operation Duck Hook." [3]

Nixon admitted in retirement that no such plan existed before his election.[4]

Although I appreciate edits to this information, all edits must be Wikipedia:Verifiability. If Nixon said he had no plan, in 1968, then find a verifable source which states this, and I will gladly accept this in the article. Otherwise unfortunalty, this is unsubstantiated POV, which does not meet the standards of Wikipedia:Verifiability.

I am a little frustrated that I write an entire section and provide 10 verifiable articles and books, with footnotes, and then portions are deleted and my edits are accused of being POV, without any of those alternative edits being substantiated, and with no real added contibutions to the article.

I still see 10 verifiable sources and 10 footnotes, the same amount that was here before this controversy began. In otherwords, thus far, no one but myself has contributed anything to this article.

Signed:Travb 18:43, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But I put in a source on Nixon disavowing having claimed to have a plan: Nixon, Richard. RN: The Memoirs of Richard Nixon. p. 198 Ellsworth 21:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And I have added the source back into the article. Ellsworth 16:31, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]