Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:07, 11 December 2019

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Everett Stern 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

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. Articles for creation This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC This article was accepted on 13 December 2013 by reviewer EatsShootsAndLeaves (talk · contribs).

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Patrick Hearn (talk · contribs) has been paid by Everett Stern. Their editing has included contributions to this article. Declaration

Do we really need every mention

I've recently come into a bit of a disagreement with Pangolin876 regarding what should be included in this article. I do not think that showing up on a TV show about whistleblowers and an appearance in Rolling Stone to be encyclopedic content - whistleblowing is what he does, so it would make sense that he's featured in these places. We should use the content of the reference to increase the content of the article, not just say "he was featured in it".

On the other hand, they think that it is not necessary to include two not-even-filed senate runs, despite him being pretty much the only opposition at the time (and especially when they're on the corresponding Misplaced Pages pages).

So there are really two issues; one is how much to include when it's just "they were mentioned" and the other is whether to include actual political information even if it's just "they announced their candidacy but didn't file". For what it's worth I'm mostly on the fence about the latter; I think that we should really only include it if we can provide a reference saying he eventually dropped and/or didn't actually file. Primefac (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

• Keep Rolling Stone - Excellent insight. I'd like to add, the Rolling Stone article clearly discussed the bank's illegal practices and the magnitude of Stern's actions by alerting the FBI and CIA. These details contribute greatly to the article. His actions don't appear to be just those of a whistle blower. As Rolling Stone's piece described, he obtained evidence of crimes from HSBC and passed it directly to the CIA (and FBI) on multiple occasions during a year or more. This is also documented by Netflix. Details in the Rolling Stone piece afford readers a critical snapshot of Stern's actions; beyond just "he was featured." It seems important. Panapublish (talk) 03:28, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

  Just as a note, I re-formatted the above comment with no content change because it's clearly a reply to my original post I have no issue with using Rolling Stone as a reference, but there is zero point in saying "he was featured in it" without giving any other details. If you want to add the ref's content the article, feel free. Primefac (talk) 12:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

  Thank you for the reformat. I added additional content for the Rolling Stone article. I also have two other sourced pieces of information to help other parts of the article, however, I'm still working out how to correctly code/add the sources. I may need some assistance in that area. Thank you again for your guidance.Panapublish (talk) 01:05, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Removal of the CIA Clandestine Service Mention

The fact that Everett Stern was in the candidate program, is established in the RT interview, and again in the Netflix program. Netflix original programming could not air the facts without vetting them, and he makes the factual statements very clearly during that segment. Netflix would have required documented evidence such as the CIA's Clandestine Service Rejection letter to allow Stern's comments on camera. Netflix had to legally verify every statement that he made. I agree with you, just because Stern said it himself does not make it valid or untrue. It is Netflix that gives credibility to his statement by including it after verifying the CIA information.

One last point, the CIA is not known for casually passing out confidential documents on their program candidates. Consequently, there is no OS research that might confirm the statement; to be found with a Google search. Asking for a third party confirmation from the CIA on this question, beyond what the Netflix lawyers verified, is a ridiculous request. The line and statement are truthful and accurate. The information should stand as I wrote it. Panapublish (talk) 17:36, 1 June 2019 (UTC) "verifiability means that other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source." Stern's statement is verifiable. Panapublish (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Interviews, being PRIMARY sources, are not considered reliable for contentious issues. I could say I was briefly considered for the head of the CIA but if I'm the only one saying it then there's no independent verification. If as you say (probably correctly) there is no independent verification of this fact, then it should not be included in this article. Just because he's truthful about other things doesn't mean he's truthful about everything. There are many sitcoms and movies whose entire plots revolve around "I told the truth except when I stretched it juuuuust a little." As a whistleblower and investigaor, saying "I was considering joining the CIA" sounds great on a resume. Primefac (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Primefac on this. I do not see the sources as reliable enough for the information to be included as fact. ~ GB fan 19:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Primefac:@GB fan:I apologize for jumping in on my own article, but I just got back from traveling and have all these alerts. I am reading these peoples comments who are trying to improve the page (which I appreciate) and the moderators (who are also trying to improve the page.) I am going to address a couple of points as I am not good with Misplaced Pages and I do not know how to separate out contents into proper sections. I first want to clarify my 2016 U.S. Senate run which was brought up for some reason. I was not just a mere candidate in that race but I went all the way spending my own money. I ran in the primary and then when I lost the primary I ran as an Independent. There are tons of news articles to support this. In 2014 yes I filed to run for Congress but two weeks later withdrew because my dad was battling cancer and I needed to be there for my family. I am not sure how me filing and then immediatly withdrawing is relevant or noteable to this article. I will leave that to the moderators and the readers. I do however agree with the person who added Rolling Stone. That was a major turning point not just in my life but in the HSBC case. Without the Rolling Stone Article the Anti-money laundering legislation I worked on with Maxine Waters never would have happened. It is very signifcant that I was featured in that magizine. Also the Netflix movie was in collaboration with Rolling Stone and was based off me being featured. Rolling Stone in my mind holds the same weight as Netflix maybe more. Please keep it in the article as I believe it is valid, but again I will leave it to the moderators. Now lets talk about the Clandestine Service. I was a little offended about what I read a moderator was saying about me as I dont say I was a candidate for the CIA as a resume boost. It is a fact in my life. I do agree with what the person who is saying about Netflix as I did have to provide a mountain of evidence including my rejection letter and other non classified CIA materials to show that yes I was a candidate. My fist interview with the CIA was actually Feb 14th 2006 and I was formally rejected in May of 2010. It was a long process. I was not a candidate for a week. The reason why Netflix found this so important was that I was not just a Whistleblower at HSBC. I was passing information to the CIA for over a year and Netflix legal counsel had to have evidence to allow me to say this on camera. I am not however going to prove myself and if Misplaced Pages does not feel Netflix is not a credible source with Alex Gibney an award winning director running this show. What I will comment on is that the Netflix movie shows a truth that the Misplaced Pages does not and I think this is why the moderators are running into people who are seeing the movie and trying to make these changes. Me being a clandestine service candidate is important part of the story as it gives people a better understanding of how I was able to pass information to the CIA 3 weeks in on the job and then continue that relationsip, and then start a Private Intelligence Agency with former CIA officers. Tactical Rabbit is not a private investigations firm. There is a big difference between Tactical Rabbit a PIA (Private Intelligence Agency) and a PI firm. Numerous articles have explained what Tactical Rabbit is. Going back to the CIA information... People are just trying to make the article more factual and to me a major Netflix documentary is a very credible source as yes I did have to prove everything I said. The Misplaced Pages article states I went to the FBI and CIA. This is not true. I went to the CIA 3 weeks in and was passing information. Then after I left the bank I went to the FBI with an intelligence report I typed called "HSBC Sponsoring Terrorism." The FBI came into play much much later. I agree with the moderators in that we have to be careful with the CIA affiliations as my official response is "I Everett Stern, was a candidate for the Clandestine Service, but was rejected before joining HSBC. I did pass information to the CIA for over a year while working at HSBC bank completly self directed (Key word). I was not as asset or working for the CIA at any point in time. I have never worked for the Central Intelligence Agency." This is my official response that I have given to every media organization or anyone that has asked me about the matter. Would I prefer that the moderators state I was a Candidate for the Clasdestine Service - NO. I appreciate what the reader is trying to do with the article and in debating the modertors, but it is not a good idea. Is it accurate and from a reliable source? Yes. The problem is people may get confused and think I was planted at HSBC by the CIA. They may think I was an operative and I have been asked this before. I even had the FBI ask me this. We cannot cause confusion. My official response above is what has to stand. Do I disagree with some of the reasons the moderations do not want the statement in the article? Yes. But I agree with the action. People cannot think I was a plant because I was not. I passed information to the CIA self directed defending the United States against the terrorist finacing I was witnessing and the criminal matipulation of the wire filter I figured out. I figured out HOW HSBC bank was getting money to terrorists and drug cartels - I had to do something. I had to take action because it was the right thing to do. I went back to my recruiter from the CIA and wrote him an email on November 12th 2010 which led to the largest fine against a bank in U.S. History. I apologize again for commenting on my page but I want to give more insite into while I appreciate what fans of Netflix are doing as they start researching me, but we have to be careful that the public does not draw the wrong conclusions. I am not interesed in people thinking I am a CIA agent when I am not. My actions may heavily indicate that I worked or worked for the CIA, but I am just a normal person trying to make a significant positive difference and do the right thing. Everettstern (talk) 03:34, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

References Removal

Hello everyone. I'm trying to find and re-input the collective references used for this page. I'm not sure when they were removed, whether intentional or not. But I believe there should be about 40 now. I have re-entered the old references and one new one, i just need to go and re-hyperlink them all. If anyone is faster at this or can restore the previous list please do! Thanks Wiki team!@AcademyPrep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academyprep (talk • contribs) 17:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Academyprep, please see WP:REFB for how to input references and format them; the method you're attempting to use is acceptable, but it's about as far down the list of "acceptable" ways to do it as possible, especially when there are already existing references. For consistency's sake the existing reference style should be used, and only modified if and when necessary - if you have additional references feel free to add them, but the existing references should not be removed unless they are somehow incorrect or out-of-date. Primefac (talk) 06:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Political Career

Hey Everyone,

Submitting for consensus that we remove the following: 

"In February 2014, Stern, a Republican, announced he was running for Pennsylvania's 13th congressional district in the 2014 elections. He withdrew from the race before the April 2014 filing deadline"

The submission filing to run was so short (less than 2 months) that is in insignificant in the subject's life and story and therefore should be omitted. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.195.29.11 (talk) 22:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Tactical Rabbit section

I did some formatting and other cleanup in Everett Stern#Tactical Rabbit but I think the recent WP:BOLD addition to this section (as well as some other content added to the article) by this edit might need a closer look. While I believe the content was added in good faith and can see that something about TR should be mentioned in the article, it has a bit of a promotional feel to it. Some of the examples given, for example, only say Stern set letters, predicted mergers not succeeding, launched company investigations, created phony Amazon accounts, etc. but don't list anything about what happened after all of those things were done. If something Stern or TR does ultimately leads to some kind of action being taken (e.g. a firing, a new law, an official investigation being conducted), then it seems like it could be mentioned; otherwise, it reads sort of like a CV for the company. Regardless, care always needs to be taken when naming specific individuals even if they're mentioned by name in the sources cited because Misplaced Pages isn't the news and there should be some encyclopedic value in mentioning such people to the reader, even when supported by sources, per WP:NOTEVERYTHING, WP:BLPCRIME and WP:BLPNAMES. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I concur; for example a removal of mine was reverted, but it's just a paragraph about how TR "looked into" a case, with no indication that them "looking into it" had anything to do with the final outcome. If there's no source saying "beacuse of Stern" or "because of Tactical Rabbit's investigation" there's no reason to include it in this article. Primefac (talk) 11:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

The Student for justice in Palestine was in the news https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/everett-stern-student-group-hamas/2014/08/12/id/588385/ and an FBI investigation was triggered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everettstern (talk • contribs) 15:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Is there a source for the FBI investigation and its outcome? Or is all we have your claims in an interview with a right-wing house organ? We ought to have far more than that before republishing unsubstantiated claims of involvement with a terrorist group. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 16:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Newsmax is not a valid source? It is right wing? Millions of Americans do not believe it is right wing. Please do not put your own personal politics inserted on my page. Newsmax is a valid source just how readers digest is also, but that was removed as well. Just because I am a republican does not mean my page should be attack by people with a liberal agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everettstern (talk • contribs) 16:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

So basically you're demanding that we report unsubstantiated claims of ties to a terrorist group based on nothing more than your say-so? No, I think not. That would be wildly undue weight and highly prejudicial. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• C-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• C-Class AfC articles
• AfC submissions by date/13 December 2013
• Accepted AfC submissions
• Talk pages of subject pages with paid contributions