Talk:Richard Nixon

1. Redirect Template:Dated maintenance category

Category:War criminals

Nixon's use of Agent Orange in Vietnam makes him a war criminal, alongside his predcessor Lyndon B. Johnson. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 13:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

There is probably some relatively impartial standard on when that category should be applied, but it is not here. Wehwalt (talk) 15:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

"There may or may not be standards that this request does not meet for reasons I will not mention"

This is not an argument. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 17:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Saying something like this in Wikivoice without some really strong sourcing violates MOS:LABEL and would be a WP:BLP violation subject to redaction here, if said about a subject who was still alive. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I gave you the source. Richard Nixon used Agent Orange in Vietnam, which was a war crime, making him a war criminal. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 18:03, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I think we would require a conviction or the equivalent, and as Mr. Nixon is dead these thirty years, I don't see that happening. Wehwalt (talk) 18:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Several war criminals were not convicted or were convicted in absentia. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 18:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:Ec You are engaging in WP:OR which is not acceptable. And again, I would have redacted this whole talk page section if it was about a living person. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright? Good for you. It's not original research, Richard Nixon was objectively a war criminal, as was his predecessor. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 18:13, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Nixon was a war criminal[1][2], and so is Dick Cheney[3], and I would like his page to be reflective of the fact. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 18:23, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Editorials are not sufficient sources for statements of this magnitude. Please learn about WP:RS. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I know more about it than anyone else. They are opinion pieces which are considered reliable sources. Otherwise, only US courts determine who is and isn't a war criminal, since anyone they might not want to be convicted of war crimes would be unlikely to stay in a country signatory to the Rome statute. Richard Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson were war criminals. Don't blame me for the fact that they killed and helped kill millions of people, nor for the fact that they were not tried for their crimes in an American or international court. You for Me and Me for You (talk) 19:18, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

"the fact that they killed and helped kill millions of people" Was not that the reason they were elected in the first place? Decision making in how to contact wars is part of the president's role in the American political system. Dimadick (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I think WP:REDFLAG applies. Wehwalt (talk) 16:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. The sources are not particularly impressive. The first one is RS, but it is a letter to the editor by a unidentified person. The second is ok, but it being a opinion piece, it would have to be attributed to the author. As per EXTRAORDINARY, I would want more than that for such a statement (as fact).Rja13ww33 (talk) 18:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Allegedly committing war crimes doesn't make someone a war criminal. He has not been found guilty of war crimes domestically or internationally. You cannot, and Wikipedia editors do not have the authority to label someone a criminal unless he has been found to be so in a court. JetLowly (talk) 13:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

The person who started this thread has been blocked for being a sockpuppet (among other things). So not sure if this thread should continue.Rja13ww33 (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Military officer?

Why is Nixon listed occupation of military officer not also the case for Eisenhower (a general) or Kennedy (a more celebrated "military officer")? IHGSA52859 (talk) 11:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I've restored the consensus version, which does not include that. Wehwalt (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

17 wiretaps of reporters and suspected leakers

I ran across this Washington Post article today: 17 Were Subjects of Wiretaps From May '69 to February '71. It describes 17 folks that were wiretapped during the Nixon administration. However I am having trouble finding where this is covered on Wikipedia. I did a quick search for the words "wiretap" and "wire tap" in this article and Watergate Scandal and didn't see anything. Anyway, does anyone know where this is covered? Any suggestions on where it should be covered? How much if any does this overlap with the Watergate Scandal, which I think was more about planting listening devices rather than wiretapping phones? I might start an article on this if I can't find it anywhere. Seems to pass GNG. New York Times: How the Wiretapping Program Began. The Atlantic. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Yes check.svg Done. Nixon wiretaps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Main bio

Nixons main bio is too long and needs to be simplified 2600:1011:B340:47FB:79E4:6DE2:F619:1384 (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Since this article became a FA a decade or so ago, people have added many things. I have tried to keep out stuff that is badly-sourced or biased, or just too obscure or unimportant, but there are limits to what can be done. For example, the article contains much more on environmental policy, and space policy than it did in 2011. My view is that few people sit down to read this bio as a whole, and the information is defensibly in this top-level article. Wehwalt (talk) 07:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)