Talk:Robert Mueller: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:19, 18 May 2017 editFundude99 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users4,083 edits →Special Counsel in infobox ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:12, 19 May 2017 edit undoEmmaCoop (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers20,511 edits →Special Counsel in infobox: AddingNext edit →
Line 137:		Line 137:

	===Special Counsel in infobox===		===Special Counsel in infobox===
			{{rfc\|pol}}
	I agree. I think the immediate ''Scramble for Africa''-esque rush to edit articles based on breaking news, some of which can be found to be '''untenable''' after further inquiry, is a tad nutty. Right now, I'm concerned with the affixation of "Special Counsel" to among Mueller's offices held given that it is not a formal title; I say this with reference to the page on ], former Solicitor General under JFK who was appointed (and subsequently fired) as Special Counsel on the Watergate story, which does NOT list this as a position he assumed in the officeholder box. What's the protocol for this? ] (]) 00:11, 18 May 2017 (UTC)		I agree. I think the immediate ''Scramble for Africa''-esque rush to edit articles based on breaking news, some of which can be found to be '''untenable''' after further inquiry, is a tad nutty. Right now, I'm concerned with the affixation of "Special Counsel" to among Mueller's offices held given that it is not a formal title; I say this with reference to the page on ], former Solicitor General under JFK who was appointed (and subsequently fired) as Special Counsel on the Watergate story, which does NOT list this as a position he assumed in the officeholder box. What's the protocol for this? ] (]) 00:11, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
	:I feel like the position should be removed. Cox does not have it on his page, and neither does ]. ] (]) 00:37, 18 May 2017 (UTC)		:I feel like the position should be removed. Cox does not have it on his page, and neither does ]. ] (]) 00:37, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:12, 19 May 2017

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Robert Mueller article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: FBI High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject FBI (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Law Enforcement High‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Use of the Word "Eavesdropping" in the Article

The word "eavesdropping" was used in the press, but it never described what was apparently going on. In many instances, at least according to reports, computer algorithms were utilized to discern patterns of communication stemming from, or going to, nations which were known terrorist havens. Had this issue been framed in more accurate conceptual terms, citizens dubious about "eavesdropping" may well have heartily approved it. Or not. Either way, the public deserved a clearer explanation of what was happening. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.149.170 (talk) 15:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Quote re paper trail

The quote was from 4/19/2002, only seven months after the attack. Have they found any paper evidence since then, e.g., such as would have been revealed during the Moussoui trial? If so, the quote should be removed as misleading. And - in this day and age does data on computers count as part of the "paper" trail - thus rendering the term "paper trail" misleading? One run ron 03:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Mr. R. S. Mueller,

I didn't know how to reach you but someone has Emaile dme saying that they are you. They said it was ok for me to take am ATM Card from a man name Rev. Monsignor Francis Please Email me at jonieglenn26@yahoo.com include this statement so I will know that it is really you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.196.61 (talk) 16:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Family Picture?

I think a good contribution to this article would be a nice family picture and the names of FBI Director Mueller's two daughters. If anyone has access to this information, please post. Thnx!

Arkhamite 01:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I edited out the phrase "top cop" as too informal. See

In addition to the inappropriate term, the president and not the FBI director is the nation's highest law enforment official, as GWB clearly implied in his speech after the 9/11 attacks. Take heed, ye mortals!

Arkhamite 10:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

થ== Family Picture? ==

Why would you want to post a picture of his family. As much as he violates people's civil liberties, doesn't mean you need to. Leave the family photos off the internet. Stick to what's in the news, which I'm surprised no one added:

Gonzales, Mueller Admit FBI Broke Law San Francisco Chronicle, CA - Mar 9, 2007 The nation's top two law enforcement officials acknowledged Friday the FBI broke the law to secretly pry out personal information about Americans...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/03/09/national/w180541S71.DTL&type=politics

10:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)A family photo could well be a bad idea. this man is a valuable man to the U.S. Terrorists could very easily get to him through his family. I am not sure if there is any easy access to a family photo or family information, but i honestly think it could be an easy way for terrorists or other organizations to get info that maybe they should not have. ofcourse this is only my oppinion.

thanks for reading.

Scammers using his name

Would it be worth mentioning that 419 scammers adopt his name and his position for recovery scams? Just to raise a bit of awareness. - 79.74.75.211 (talk) 17:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

A family photo could well be a bad idea. this man is a valuable man to the U.S. Terrorists could very easily get to him through his family. I am not sure if there is any easy access to a family photo or family information, but i honestly think it could be an easy way for terrorists or other organizations to get info that maybe they should not have. ofcourse this is only my oppinion.

thanks for reading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.22.22 (talk) 11:53, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I stood next to him on the Esplanade in Boston watching the fireworks on July 4th, around 1030 or so. That picture of him is a bit out of date, he looks like he's aged ten years and has a thinner, more angular face compared to the current picture. 173.48.243.240 (talk) 00:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

To who it may concern

My There seems to be a lot of fraud and miss use of my name with officials for illegal criminal activity even with government officials as well as bankers in (Nigeria)it all started, when I gave my new email address to a gaming officials here in AZ on june 06 of this year they contacted me you see I like to play the seepstakes, here in the United States of America and now I get mails from attornies government, bankers everykind of criminal activty for example money laudary of terrorist activity as well I'm sure. I know you must be a very busy man. I don't even bother to answer then. Also now there contacting me from other countries now. Sorry had to delete my name.

Sincerely,

thanks for reading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.22.22 (talk) 11:51, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

How do we know when it is the government and not a scam...?

who are these people that use our governments personnels name and make it seem that the FBI is telling people via the email that there are banks or other countries that need to send us money because it is due to us and that the respectable Robert Mueller is the one authorizing all this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.242.113 (talk) 16:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm very glad, and no doubt is the vast majority of the Misplaced Pages community, that you took the trouble to ask this (these) particular pertinent question (s). Please be assured that all the points will be answered (to the best of everyone's ability) in the fullness of time. Vandagard (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

If it is too good to be true, then it probably isn't true.

Age

Re: his age - he's 68 now. isn't there a way to automatically update someone's age using an applet in these things? Bluthund (talk) 20:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The template {{Birth date and age}}, which is used in the information box already, automagically calculates age. He was born in August 1944, so he will be 2010 - 1944 = 66 later this year. — MrDolomite • Talk 20:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Nickname

Is there a place in the article for his nickname - Bobby three sticks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.66.127 (talk) 22:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

FBI director for nearly a decade

Mueller has been FBI Director for nearly a decade and there are FOUR sentences about him during this period. Does the FBI monitor his wiki page? ;-) 69.245.157.223 (talk) 03:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)Scotti

Politics?

Mueller is clearly a highly political individual, yet there is no mention in this article of his political orientation. That omission needs to be rectified. Dagme (talk) 13:45, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Various 2013 issues/hearing

Here's a couple articles about the June hearings where Mueller gave opinions on subjects like IRS related investigations, PRISM leak, surveillance in general, etc.

Well that's a start. It would be great if someone else updated, but I'll see what I can do. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 04:35, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Robert Mueller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130103060505/http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/history/directors/directors_then_and_now/ to https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/history/directors/directors_then_and_now

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:41, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

May 17, 2017 When breaking news becomes an encyclopedia

About half an hour ago, national and global media announced that Robert Mueller would be appointed as a Special Prosecutor to investigate Russia and the Trump campaign.

Within minutes, from 22:04 to 22:38 according to the page history, the Misplaced Pages page has been edited 52 times. Hello?

Misplaced Pages bunnies, slow down a bit. You are not news reporters, nor reporters of breaking news written by reporters. Give the story enough time to become an encyclopedic event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.59.71.63 (talk) 22:51, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Note that not all the edits are about the news. Several are in other areas of the article, tidying things up or removing information that can't be verified with reliable sources. I noticed several reasonable edits, such as unverifiable ancestry claims, apparently by editors familiar with Misplaced Pages's guidelines for biographies of living persons (WP:BLP). 173.239.240.118 (talk) 23:42, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Special Counsel in infobox

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. Within 24 hours, this page will be added to the following list:

Politics, government, and law

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

I agree. I think the immediate Scramble for Africa-esque rush to edit articles based on breaking news, some of which can be found to be untenable after further inquiry, is a tad nutty. Right now, I'm concerned with the affixation of "Special Counsel" to among Mueller's offices held given that it is not a formal title; I say this with reference to the page on Archibald Cox, former Solicitor General under JFK who was appointed (and subsequently fired) as Special Counsel on the Watergate story, which does NOT list this as a position he assumed in the officeholder box. What's the protocol for this? Frevangelion (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I feel like the position should be removed. Cox does not have it on his page, and neither does Patrick Fitzgerald. JocularJellyfish (talk) 00:37, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I disagree. Just because Cox and Fitzgerald don't have it doesn't mean Mueller can't. Although it is not a formal title, he does have the same powers as a federal prosecutor and cannot be fired by the President. —Fundude99 00:50, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's a touch too soon. In any case, it says so right in the lead. It may be a good idea to let the consensus develop a bit. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I think it's more useful than not and should be restored. I think Cox's should include it too (among other changes needed at that page--making it a bit OTHERSTUFF for me.) Innisfree987 (talk) 01:15, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

If it's restored, I suggest then some of the early career positions should be removed from the infobox, such as "United States Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division" and the one below it. The infobox is already quite long. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes K.e.coffman, I tend to agree it's too long; my one hesitation about cutting those other posts is that I think it is useful to readers to see at a glance in which Administrations he's served. I'd actually liked your previous approach of removing predecessors (and successors?), as that information is also given in a chart at the bottom of the entry (and IMO bears less directly on his bio). What do you and others think, ok to take predecessor/successor out for concision? Innisfree987 (talk) 05:00, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect. The President has the full authority to dismiss Mueller. Read former DOJ attorney Neal Katyal's Twitter thread for specific details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frevangelion (talk • contribs) 04:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Technically, the President cannot "directly" dismiss Mueller. Trump can order Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein to fire Mueller, and fire Rosenstein if he refuses. Which would obliviously be bad for Trump if he does.—Fundude99 05:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

"Position established" vs. "Position Established"

@JocularJellyfish: It has been precedent that the second word is lowercase. It is with George Washington as "Inaugural holder" or "Position abolished" — you changed that on April 30 to fit your preference. In William J. Donovan, it is "Position established" under Coordinator of Information. In Keith Ellison, it is "Position established" under Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee. In Elizabeth Warren, it is "Position established" under Special Advisor for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 02:01, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Good to know. I won't make those changes again. JocularJellyfish (talk) 02:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Categories: