Talk:Jeb Stuart Magruder

Significant name

His name includes the names of two of the most prominent Confederates from the Civil War. This must be significant. 81.129.150.171 (talk) 00:28, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Added, sourced from obituary which said his father was a Civil War buff and named him for Jeb Stuart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.32.208 (talk) 04:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Reads like an autobiography or memoir

Frankly, this is garbage. The whole article is self-serving and seems to be based almost entirely on Magruder's own opinions and rosy recollections. Needless to say, such material is not remotely "encylopedic." This article should be cut down to the bare minimum of verifiable content, if any. Dratman (talk) 09:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Agree that more sources are needed, as it relies almost exclusively on Magruder's own memoir about the Watergate scandal. With all that has been written about this, there must be other accounts of him and appraisal of his actions.Parkwells (talk) 13:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Removing extraneous, PR-oriented material in the summary to improve readability and help it conform to other entries which are similar in importance to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.32.208 (talk) 03:05, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Text removed per WP:BLP

Per the policy on biographies of living persons, I have removed the following text from the article in the section "Continued controversy," since it is not clear that the 2007 articles by Marx and Decker (not available online) document a 2003 and a 2005 arrest: "Magruder has had two run-ins with the law in recent years. He was arrested in 2003 for disorderly conduct in Grandview Heights, Ohio, and was arrested for drunken driving (later reduced to a charge of reckless operation) in Fayette County, Ohio, in 2005." The text should not be restored to the article without a specific inline reference to a reliable source. Edison (talk) 21:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Re-write essential

This article really needs to be re-written. It is confused, poorly written and creates more confusion than enlightenment.

The section "continued controversy" largely revolves around a book by two authors without credentials and who wrote nothing else. And they were sued and settled a defamation case by John Dean. Their book asserts that Nixon was a dupe in the hands of John Dean and that Al Haig engineered his ouster because the military wanted to punish him for the "peace" in Vietnam. Don't extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof? Anyway one of the sentences in this article is truly preposterous. It claims that Dean's 1976 book Blind Ambition "had very profound and damaging effects on the reputations of senior figures such as H.R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, and John N. Mitchell." (The cite is to the same revisionist book.) So we are supposed to believe that Blind Ambition somehow blackened the image of 3 high officials who had been convicted of federal felonies before the book was published and were serving prison time when it came out? But for Blind Ambition I gues we can assume that the public would have just considered these guys as your ordinary law abiding federal felons.

The section also says that at the time that Magruder made his claims to the revisionist authors "Magruder was a Presbyterian minister in Columbus, Ohio." Is this supposed to bolster his credibility? It all seems like special pleading, as does the fact that the picture of Magrude at the top shows him in clerical digs. If his religious work is what characterizes his life, why is there not more of it in the article? Maybe also explain how a man of the cloth ends up with two divorces too.

This may be one of the worst articles I have ever seen in Wikipedia. I wonder if Magruder was behind it. AnthroMimus (talk) 02:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)