Talk:Chris Wakim

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Contents 1 Request for Comment 2 Master's degree - puzzle 3 Veteran status and VFW comment 4 Raw Story Link Wrong

[edit] Request for Comment

• While Wakim seems to have fudged his service record and his educational record, I'm not convinced that it rises to the level to merit inclusion in Category:Fraudsters or Category:Impostors. Imposters are people that claim to literally be someone else and his actions do not seem to fit the legal definition of fraud. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 12:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It's not fraud unless he's convicted under that charge. John Broughton 13:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The criteria for Category:Impostors is "individuals whose principal claim to notoriety is in having passed themselves off as a person or type of person whom they are not. Individual mainly notable for other reasons, who may have made misrepresentations during their lives or careers, are not included here. For example, a politician or celebrity who had incidentally exaggerated their achievements is not an imposter, in this sense." This one is a clear and obvious call; politicians who exaggerated what they did are explicitly excluded by the criteria on the category.

WP:BLP, our policy on biographies of living people, says that we have to hold negative material about living people to the highest standards of sourcing, and remove it until it is so sourced. It also says:

"Biographies of living people should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. While a strategy of eventualism may apply to other subject areas, badly written biographies of living persons should be stubbed or deleted.

The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable third party sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral, factual, and understated, avoiding both a sympathetic point of view and an advocacy journalism point of view."

The requirement to be understated would mean that until non-partisan reliable sources describe him as a fraudster in their own voice (not quoting someone else), we can't so describe, and that even then we don't have to so describe. So this category (or actually Category:American fraudsters) should not be applied on the evidence presented. GRBerry 14:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Master's degree - puzzle

Here are three facts:

• The Arab American News reported that "After his command, the Army facilitated Wakim’s graduate studies, allowing him to pursue a Master's of Arts degree at Harvard University."[1]

• Wakim told reporters "I earned a degree at night while acting as an infantry officer." [2]

• The Army does not require officers to get permission to take classes outside of duty hours.

The puzzle is that the Army sometimes does authorize officers to get a masters degree while on active duty (the officer must commit to staying in the Army for additional years). I'm probably reading too much into this, however, by thinking that Wakim is trying to imply that he was so favorted - but I'd appreciate anyone else's feedback. Maybe Wakim was saying that the Army helped pay his tuition. [3] John Broughton 13:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

As a veteran I may be able to clear this up. While I know nothing about Chris Wakim in particular, no one in the armed forces (officer or enlisted) needs permission to pursue educational studies during off duty hours. However, it would require permission and a good deal of paperwork to become a full time student: the service would pay tuition and expenses plus a modest stipend in return for an extension in the person's term of service. Both of these options are different from the G.I. bill, which becomes accessible only after a service member ceases to be active duty. What many people do is begin a degree during active service by taking evening or online courses, then transfer the credits and become full time students when they return to civilian life.

Not knowing the details of Chris Wakim's claims, it looks like either:

• He earned a degree by studying part-time while on active duty, which doesn't imply that he was accepted into any selective program.
• He earned most of a degree while on active duty and completed the degree as a civilian, which might be a slight exaggeration or a journalist's misquote. Durova 14:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Veteran status and VFW comment

Wakim’s claim that he is a "Gulf War veteran" has been challenged. "To be considered a veteran of the first Gulf War, one must receive the Southwest Asia Service Medal. The absence of the medal makes one a Gulf War-era veteran." said a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Wakim said he does not have that medal.

Read that again; the quotation either should have a "(sic)" or be corrected. As is, it looks like, previously unbeknownst to me, I'm a Gulf War veteran! Cool! --BDD 04:20, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Raw Story Link Wrong

The Raw Story link thats attached to his education piece is wrong. It states that Harvard Extension is not a part of Harvard University but only affiliated with it. Harvard Extension is a part of the University and a part of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. It is just a division of the Continuing Education School. Secondly, the programs is not wholly open enrollement. You cannot just sign up for a class and get a degree. You have to take 3 classes and get a B- average (2.5) GPA. Even then that is just the minimum and usually a 3.0 is more of a shoe in. Also, after completing the three classes plus a writing extensive course, you then formally apply to the program, (i.e. resume, application, essays, letter of rec.) while admissions reviews your application. So the notion that it's a fully open enrollement program is way off the mark. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.64.14.149 (talk) 00:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC).