Talk:Kenneth Adelman

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.

Biography: Politics and Government B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal 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 Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cold War (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles

Invasion or Occupation a cakewalk?[edit]

The quote from the article "He also claimed that the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq would be a cakewalk: 'I believe that demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk.'" sounds to me like he is speaking of the invasion being relatively easy versus the occupation being easy, but the website pointed to merely points to another website. The quote (and much of the other material) was added by an anonymous editor. Can anyone speak to this? (Also, I dislike the use of "cakewalk" to describe a quotation that uses the same word, but that's easy to fix once the meaning of the quotation is clarified.) Pawl 19:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[1] is a 2002 Washington Post news article that quotes the cakewalk and no need for 'inky-dink nations as "coalition partners" '. It does not say the occupation would be a cakewalk - because this foreign policy expert does not appear to have given any thought to the subsequent occupation at all. Herne nz 06:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - how did I miss that link in the article before? Reading the entire editorial, I see that two separate quotes were stitched together to give a misleading impression about what was being said. The "we don't need partners" quote isn't about "we don't need partners to defeat Iraq" but "we don't need partners to concvince the Democrats that we need to invade". I will try to fix it. -- Pawl 15:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[2] is a 2002 Washington Post news article also quotes at the last paragrah that

"Measured by any cost-benefit analysis, such an operation would constitute the greatest victory in America's war on terrorism.". -- Did this cost-benefit analysis include the occupation cost? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.123.222.216 (talk) 03:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It wasn't an article in the Vanity Fair magazine[edit]

The article was only on the Vanity Fair website. The article itself says it's a preview of the issue being delivered in December 2006. Pgrote 04:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing that! --Oakshade 04:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was eventually published in the magazine and it was just adjusted in the article. --Oakshade 19:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translator[edit]

What languages does Adelman speak? The article says he was a translator (for Ali at Rumble in the Jungle). Superm401 - Talk 02:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly French, since that was/is the official government language of Zaire/Dem. Rep. of the Congo. Don't know for sure. --Oakshade 03:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be my guess, too. However, it's just a guess and I haven't found any info, so I'm removing the line for now. No one should add it back without a full citation that shows he was a translator, and indicates which languages he translated between. Superm401 - Talk 05:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree a citation is good, I don't think it needs the specific language, although that would be more informative. The notable point would be him being a translator for Ali during the time of a legendary bout. --Oakshade 05:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Adelman of the California Coastal Records Project[edit]

There is a another Kenneth Adelman who organises the California Coastal Records Project. He and the project gained notarity when Barbra Streisand sued them. The publicity generated by the lawsuit has given rise to the term Streisand effect. I found this article when looking for information about this other Kenneth Adelman.

To help other people, I added a line about this other Kenneth Adelman that linked to the article on the California Coastal Records Project. Oakshade deleted this line. I still think that the other Kenneth Adelman should be mentioned. What do other people think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.45.180 (talk) 01:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel this other Kenneth Adelman is notable enough for his own article, you can create one and call it "Kenneth Adelman (organizer)" (or whatever else you think would be appropriate for the parathenses) and then place the following tag on the top of this article (click edit to this page to see the appropriate tag characters):

This will indicate the other Kenneth Adelman article and provide the link to it.

If there is no other article existing, there is no reason to include such content in this one.--Oakshade (talk) 01:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External link to interview on nuclear policy?[edit]

Would an interview with Kenneth Adelman from 1989 be useful here as an external link? Focus of conversation is nuclear weapons policy. http://openvault.wgbh.org/catalog/V_6C4E2DA442BA45D0BDE00362D7C68640 (I helped with the site, so it would be conflict of interest for me to just add it.) Mccallucc (talk) 20:50, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kenneth Adelman. 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/20071018044931/http://cla.calpoly.edu:16080/~smarx/Shakespeare/draftingshakespeare2006/DawsonOthello.htm to http://cla.calpoly.edu:16080/~smarx/Shakespeare/draftingshakespeare2006/DawsonOthello.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 22:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Reagan & Gorbachev" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Reagan & Gorbachev. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 27#Reagan & Gorbachev until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]