Talk:Peter Pace

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote[edit]

<Break> It would probably be better to modify the block qtn that I posted re the Rumsfeld press conference to a summary; more wiki-ish. Billbrock 05:20, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks okay to me. Perhaps down the road when the incident has faded from the public consciousness some, it could be drawn back into a summary paragraph. DanielM 02:03, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I hope this episode never fades from the public consciousness. Thats a ballsy move on his part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.244.203 (talk) 07:43, 11 April 2006

Order of the sacred treasures of japan?[edit]

Does he really have this medal? He's not on the list of known recipients on that medal's page- it seems like a Japanese award.

Tbsmith 12:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added LGBT Portal to Comments about gays[edit]

I added the LGBT portal on the section about Pace's comments on gays --Allyn 02:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a bad idea - however, you added the infobox. I added the portal which is smaller, less intrusive and seems more appropriate to this comment. ZueJay (talk) 02:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it's gone now. Dumaka (talk) 15:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Educational Information[edit]

The program for the Senior Executives in National and International Security program at Harvard is a two-week program where officials come to discuss issues and share viewpoints. One does not receive institutional credit. Mentioning it as part of Pace's education (saying he "attended" Harvard) is misleading, as was the discussion of the Georgetown Seminar. Educational information should be limited to institutions where Pace spent considerable time or earned a degree; this is not the case with Harvard certainly, although I am less sure about the seminar at Georgetown. I deleted these references. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.84.61.130 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 3 April 2007 UTC.


Confusing "Vandalism" with breaking news?[edit]

MSNBC's reporting that Pace is out at JCS; I was pleasantly surprised to see the article already had that, but now someone has decided that's "vandalism" and removed it?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Andersonblog (talk • contribs)

I checked at the time that I reverted it and didn't see any news on it, so I removed it. Plus, it said that he was no longer Chairman (which is incorrect) and that he had been removed by the SecDef (which is incorrect). JCO312 17:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i think this page should be protected manchurian candidate 17:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC) Bold text

Yeah, I think this page might need to be protected. People who are not checking the news carefully think Pace is already out, and have made that change, incorrectly. He's still the JCS chair, and his successor hasn't even been formally nominated yet, only proposed. I'm going to change his status to current chair again, if someone else hasn't already. Nam1123 17:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not overstate this[edit]

The Secretary of Defense has said that he intends to advise the President not to renominate General Pace, and to instead nominate Admiral Mullen. This does not mean 1) that General Pace is no longer the Chairman, 2) that the President will or will not renominate General Pace, 3) that Admiral Mullen is General Pace's "successor." There remains a nomination, hearings, and confirmation by the Senate and the retirement of General Pace in September before some of those changes can be made. Reporting information is one thing, predicting the future, even good predicitions, is another. JCO312 17:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The subsection was titled "Retirement", which doesn't seem appropriate for the story as it is unfolding. I changed it to "Possibly no 2nd term", but I'm open to changes/discussion. I've added citations to verify the story. I've not seen much editing the hour or so before I added references, so I didn't semi-protect the page. It does bear keeping an eye on. — ERcheck (talk) 19:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tried for a slightly more professional title. I'm still not thrilled with it though. JCO312 19:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

It says he commands 2nd Battalion 1st Marines. Isn't it a bit outdated? --Tigga en 05:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That space is meant to list all a persons previous commands. It isn't meant to be present tense. JCO312 18:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Question[edit]

How can someone make the virtual medal ribbons like as shown in Pter Pace's article? I would like to put together some of the virtual ribbons together as whoever made that pic did, but idk how to do it. Can someonoe plz help? Also, how would you find those virtual-looking ribbons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.29.168 (talk) 06:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Millenium Challenge[edit]

I was just reading the Millennium_Challenge_2002 article, in which General Pace is said to have interrupted the war game because(?) Red was winning, and overseeing a rather controversial change to the rules of engagement. Is that worthy of mention here? Mcswell (talk) 00:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting the Record[edit]

Under "Military retirement" - I changed 'seven handwritten notes' to 'four' [I work for General Pace, and though there is no public reference/footnote as to the #, I have firsthand knowledge that he placed 4 cards to the Wall.]

Under "Post-military career" - I removed "as a consultant at the Washington DC-based lobbying firm Barbour, Griffith & Rogers, LLC, also known as the BGR Group." Washington Times (erroneously) reported that General Pace accepted a position with BGR, but General Pace did not accept the job.

Under "Post-military career" - I replace the incorrect BGR reference with "Chairman of the Board for Wall Street Warfighters Foundation, an organization that provides training support and job placement services for disabled veterans interested in careers in the financial services industry." Following link serves as both an external link and reference. http://www.wallstreetwarfighters.org/

I apologize for not understanding/following the Wikipedia rules on format. I appreciate your help in correcting General Pace's biography. --KtHaddock (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Firsthand knowledge" isn't sufficient on Wikipedia to either add or remove cited information. Although I appreciate how that might be frustrating, it is the rule. If you can find a source for what you say is incorrect information, then it could certainly be removed, but the fact that you work for General Pace isn't enough of a reason. JCO312 (talk) 02:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct - it is very frustrating to be asked to prove a negative. The Washington Times article is incorrect. They did not print a retraction. What would Wikipedia editors consider a verifiable source that something did NOT happen? Does a link to the "leadership" page from BGR's website, without General Pace's name, "prove" he doesn't work there? An unsigned contract? Even a letter from BGR indicating General Pace would not appear to meet Wikipedia standards for a public, verifiable source. The same goes for the article that said he left 7 notecards. He recited 7 names during the retirement speech, but he only left 4 notecards. Could a photo of the 4 cards serve as a source? But how does that "prove" there weren't three others outside of the frame? What would you recommend General Pace do to get these errors of fact corrected? I appreciate any ideas/help you can offer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KtHaddock (talk • contribs) 04:48, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wish I had a good answer for you, beyond saying that the system generally works to ensure accurate information. The unfortunate truth is that a Washington Post article is going to trump any editor saying that they have personal knowledge of a fact. I know that's frustrating, but I'm sure you understand why it makes sense. Anyone could claim personal knowledge of a fact and try and change and entry based on that. I'll ask around and see if I can figure out a way to correct the article. JCO312 (talk) 14:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the exact number a moot point by changing it to simply say "several"... the exact number is besides the point anyway.
As far as the BGR offer goes, a simple redaction from the Times or a press release from either Pace or the BGR firm explicitly stating that he never worked for them and that the Times story was erroneous. However, the point is that the source has to be at least as reliable as the Times one is to refute it. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 18:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Bahamut. As I'm not interested in getting into an edit war with you over the point, I'm going to raise them here.

First, the BLP does not state in any form that controversial material is disallowed if it can be properly sourced. The section on the comments Gen. Pace made are both sourced and a matter of public record. Secondly, the section on the comments he made is not irrelevant, based on the fact that Don't ask, don't tell is still very much in effect, and his comments, made as CJCS, are pertinent.

I feel very strongly that the comments should be left in and move to have the comments placed back in the article as written.

fritte (talk) 20:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His comments were made many years ago, long before the recent hubbub about repealing DADT has come to the forefront of the media consciousness. There is no need to label every military leader as for or against DADT, especially those that are retired and no longer in positions of influence over the policy anyway. His tenure as Chairman never touched upon DADT, so it makes as much sense to include his comments on the matter as it would his opinions on abortion or whether Puerto rico should be the 51st state. Attempting to force relevance (especially with the prominence you gave it, with its own section in the prose) really smacks of POV-pushing in a pro-gay rights light; see WP:UNDUE.
If you can convince me that his opinion on DADT has had a significant role in... well, anything, aside from a sound bite on the evening news that day, I will consider compromising and adding the quote to the quotes section. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 13:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for you response. I'll go for the issue of the prominence first, since I agree with you that the comments should just have been added as part of the prose rather than a whole new section which it has had in the past. I wasn't trying to push for any point of view on the matter, but rather mention a part of his tenure which I felt was significant and in my view bore being mentioned. My reasons for it being included in some form are twofold; first, that Gen. Pace did create a great deal of controvercy with the comments he made, it even made headlines in Europe. And secondly, I don't think believe that purging the page completely of any mention of them serves the encyclopedia any good either, since, as I said, it was controversial at the time and still is for many people, including members of the US military.
I understand that General Pace has been retired for several years, but as the policy is still in effect and has come back up for review, I believe comments he made while CJCS are relevant and that as a former CJSC, his view would carry some weight were he to be consulted on the matter. As such, would you agree to a short paragraph stating something like "In March 2007, General Pace made some comments on the state of the policy "Don't ask, don't tell", which created some controvercy. He later added that the views expressed were his personal beliefs and did not neccessarily reflect views of the US military as a whole."? English is not my mothertongue and I apologise for my bad sentence construction in advance :D fritte (talk) 19:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you source this controversy? We'd need something more than blog entries, like an article about the effect his remarks had. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 19:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1598653,00.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6446815.stm http://articles.cnn.com/2007-03-13/us/gays.military_1_homosexual-acts-peter-pace-immoral-acts?_s=PM:US would these be sufficient? fritte (talk) 19:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awards[edit]

I got a message to tune of: "Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Peter Pace. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gaia Octavia Agrippa" Please note all I did was to modify the graphic of General Pace's ribbons to reflect the medals in the picture to the right of the graphic. It does not state in the bio that he was every awarded Distinguished Service Medals from the Army, Air Force and Coast Guard. Also "unconstructive" should be "nonconstructive" Gaia. "Unconstructive" is not a word. r/ Justin... User talk:137.246.207.200

The message to your talk page was likely a simple vandalism patrol which noted your unexplained removal of referenced content. The message was simply a standardized form template.
As to the content of your edit, it was not constructive, as you are incorrect. He was indeed awarded those medals, as corroborated by references in the "references" section. The photo does not show them because he was awarded at his retirement ceremony, and no subsequent photo of him in uniform was taken. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 15:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bahamut: I checked the refrences and dont see anything that stated he was awarded those medals during his retirenment. I also saw a picture of him at his retirenment and he only had one medal attached to his uniform by the POTUS. It was the DDSM. DODCTR (talk) 17:17, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, you missed one. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 17:21, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha! thanks for keeping the record straightDODCTR (talk) 17:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Date format[edit]

This article uses a mix of month–day–year date format (e.g., "born November 5, 1945") and day–month–year format (e.g., "On 1 October 2007 ..."). There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers § RfC: What does DATETIES mean for articles on US military personnel? seeking to clarify which date format should apply to articles such as this. —sroc 💬 09:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Peter Pace. 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:

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: 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:43, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Peter Pace/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I'd like to know what city in Italy Peter Pace's father came from. I have a paternal grandmother whose maiden name was Pace and I just wanted to know if there is any relation. Thank you.

Last edited at 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 02:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Peter Pace. 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:

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) 12:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Peter Pace. 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:

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) 11:23, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_Pace&oldid=1204492640"