Talk:Steve J. Rosen

Strange deletion discussion

If you click on "what links here" there is a list of deletion talks.

If do not understand that. I created this article how can they discuss whether or not to delete before they make it?

They voted to keep it. Strange as no article existed.

Question: Since Steve Rosen is credited with building AIPAC into what it is today is the FBI considering continuing investigations? I think the fact that he was recently fired after comming under investigation may mean that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

AIPAC is probably very safe from FBI investigation. Counterpunch recntly had an interesting article on Mr Rosen. His comment that "AIPAC owns the T list" should come back to bite him and AIPAC but a little extra cash should smooth any ruffled feathers. T list - Terrorist list.159.105.80.141 17:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

RE the above deletion talks - do you have a list of those who wanted to delete it almost at birth? An article on wiki bias could lead off with this. Did the same crowd ever get together to delete the David Irving article? 159.105.80.141 12:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Article needs updating

Since the judge ruled govt had to jump a high bar to prove that giving up classified info a crime. Like in this article. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Critics of AIPAC

"Critics of Aipac, use [Rosen's] case as vindication of their views."

What the hell is that? Blatant POV if I've ever seen it. More Zionist bullshit on Wikipedia.24.140.104.139 (talk) 06:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The problem is not the statement if sourced and since opinionated, the source should be mentioned. The problem is inadequate sourcing with footnotes that are not done properly. I put up tag to that effect. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

This article needs some serious referencing work, but I don't have time right now.

Most of the prosecution section can be cut quite a bit; though it is an important case because of civil liberties implications for other private citizens who want to pass on classified info they have obtained (though obviously one can debate the merits of individual cases in larger political/moral terms). If a WP:RS can be found on what the implications would have been if AIPAC had been a registered foreign agent, that would be interesting too, of course.

Other stuff can be added, including taking some stuff out of lead and putting in article and like his well-documented leading the charge vs. Charles W. Freeman, Jr.. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Steve J. Rosen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090316153556/http://article.nationalreview.com:80/print/?q=NjkyM2E5ZGE0ODdmNGViZjhhMDBiNWRlMWJmZTUxYTQ= to http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NjkyM2E5ZGE0ODdmNGViZjhhMDBiNWRlMWJmZTUxYTQ=
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090316230031/http://www.samuelgarrick.com:80/pubs/2006/08/a_more_secret_government/ to http://www.samuelgarrick.com/pubs/2006/08/a_more_secret_government
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227041916/http://jta.org:80/news/article/2009/02/24/1003244/appeals-court-throws-out-govt-appeal-on-aipac-decisions to http://jta.org/news/article/2009/02/24/1003244/appeals-court-throws-out-govt-appeal-on-aipac-decisions

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

External links

There are 22 entries in three subsections in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.

• ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
• LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
• WP:ELMIN: Minimize the number of links.

WP:ELCITE states: ... dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section.

Trim links and remove 2013 tag. --