Talk:Single-bullet theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revision as of 11:56, 29 March 2025 by imported>Edward321 (Heavy handed)
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Latest comment: 29 March by Edward321 in topic Heavy handed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />

Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".

Script error: No such module "Unsubst". Template:TmboxTemplate:Talk other Template:WikiProject banner shell User:MiszaBot/config

Pop Culture section

i see that its been tagged for improvement for months. Most of the entries seem to be reaching extremely far in their connection to the Kennedy assassination and have no historical significance to the article at hand. The article would benefit as a whole if the entire section was taken out. J.Rly (talk) 04:21, 27 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Done. Cerulean Depths (talk) 20:34, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

The latest ref about Cokie Roberts

Dear Mr. Phillips,

Thank you for your addition. However, I don't believe we at Wikipedia accept word of mouth as reliable evidence. If you interviewed Ms. Roberts as you assert, you'll have to produce a published copy of that interview. Otherwise I don't believe your testimony will stand on the page as it is right now. Thank you, warshy (¥¥) 19:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

SS agent Paul Landis

November 2023, Secret Service agent Paul Landis came forward with claims that he actually found bullet CE399 wedged in the limo's seat behind Jackie, and that he pocketed it, then ultimately placed it on JFK's gurney. Someone might want to update this wiki with this info.

I suppose a question could then be asked: Where then did the bullet in Connelly's leg go? 2600:1700:A3D3:8210:EC76:3C30:FFFD:DF0A (talk) 06:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Heavy handed

The sentence ‘If so…bone’ in paragraph three is a heavy-handed description couched in such a way as to prompt incredulity. In fact one reads on to discover that it’s a non-issue. 2A00:23C7:3D17:9201:4C25:2995:50E6:C33C (talk) 08:32, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

That sentence is also unsourced. Edward321 (talk) 11:56, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply