Talk:Carl Higbie

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://carlhigbie.com/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Dubious content removed

I've removed some curiously promotional and highly questionable content from this article. Some examples:

• The article said that "Carl Higbie served for nearly a decade as a U.S. Navy SEAL capturing high value targets in Iraq". That is not mentioned in the source cited, which apparently says that he was in Iraq twice, wrote a book, went on WND News Radio to publicise it, called a general a moron and Iraqi soldiers stupid, and made a number of unfounded and unbelievable claims.
• The article said that "Carl Higbie led the Navy SEAL Team which captured the infamous "Butcher of Fallujah" Ahmad Hashim Abd al-Isawi". But the source for that was a book by Carl Higbie, clearly not a WP:reliable source for this statement. None of the three (1, 2, 3) independent sources cited later in the same paragraph has any mention of Higbie. One of them is about a film directed by Clint Eastwood.

Wikipedia is built on independent reliable sources. None of this content should be restored to the article unless so supported. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: On your second point, I don't see anything in your link on reliable sources that would exclude this subject's book as a reliable source. The closest I can see is that non-primary sources are preferable. Why specifically do you think it is unreliable? Are you saying you want a secondary source citing to the book? If it suits you, you can indicate that the claim that he had a leadership role is his. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.245.132 (talk) 21:04, 4 June 2017

Major cuts

@Bbb23: if you aren't willing to at least wait until I have finished adding to the article, would you at least do me the courtesy of discussion? I do not agree that Higbie's defense of Trump on the Khan controversy should be excluded from the article, Higbie took a position at odds with very many people. The constitutional commentary on Korematsu was a direct response to Higbie's comments, Fein's article beginning "Carl Higbie, former Navy SEAL and spokesman for the pro-Trump Great America PAC, insinuated on Fox News with Megyn Kelly that the president-elect might legally target Muslims for adverse treatment in reliance on the Supreme Court’s World War II precedent in Korematsu v. United States (1944). That reliance would be misplaced." Had you asked me before cutting, or looked at the sources, I could have explained these to you. I am not saying that everything I write is brilliant and can't be changed, nor do I WP:OWN the article, but having spent hours adding content, I do have reasons for what I added and am also aware what else I intend to put in. Please, let's try some collaboration. EdChem (talk) 14:16, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You are the one who could have discussed the huge changes you were making to the article but instead decided just to forge ahead. The article reads more like an article about Trump than Higbie.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I take it "huge changes you are making" is your code for "expanding a stub of questionable notability". If you can't see that commentary DIRECTLY addressing points Higbie made (like the legal commentary in HuffPost) and statements DIRECTLY MADE by Higbie on the Khans is relevant, then you make me doubt whether you are competent to edit this article. And, as and admin, you should be aware of the value of discussion. The way it doesn't work is I add content then you swoop in and slash and declare discussion is not the WP way. EdChem (talk) 14:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't respond well to incivility. We'll see if other editors have any thoughts on the material added and even the material currently in the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

This revert of a significantly different version of the text, much shortened, greater focus on Higbie's actions, has been reverted without discussion - the "D" of the BRD mentioned in the edit summary. Bbb23, are you going to explain why Higbie's own comments, reported on in his capacity of a spokesman for the Super PAC which is the subject of the section, is in your view irrelevant / undue for inclusion at all in this bio of Higbie? EdChem (talk) 15:27, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Lead paragraph

An IP editor is removing sourced content from the lead, as seen here. They allege they are removing "lies", but the content they are removing is reliably sourced. Documenting the event on the talk page, in case they wish to make their case for why the content is "lies". Isaidnoway (talk) 00:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)