Talk:Links between Trump associates and Russian officials
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Links between Trump associates and Russian officials article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
This article was nominated for deletion on 31 May 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections was copied or moved into Links between Trump associates and Russian officials on 20:48, 30 May 2017. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
All Primary Sources
editElsewhere on Wikipedia this level of evidence is recognized as conspiracy theory. It is almost all primary sources and since the Mueller Report this article has been shown to be a collection of published rumors and legal contacts.64.31.13.163 (talk) 08:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- HAve you read wp:primary? Slatersteven (talk) 08:31, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Kilimnik linked to Russian intel
editThe last paragraph of the section for Paul Manafort includes the statement: “Manafort met with Konstantin Kilimnik, who is believed to be linked to Russian intelligence”.
In fact, Kilimnik’s link to Russian intelligence has been firmly established. It was revealed in April 2021 by the U.S. Department of the Treasury that Kilimnik is a “known Russian Intelligence Services agent”. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0126
This information was also reported by the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/15/us/politics/russian-intelligence-trump-campaign.html
The sentence I quoted above should be edited to reflect this. 100.11.96.78 (talk) 02:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Why is Wikipedia promoting propaganda and lies.
editThis is not truthful. It’s promoting lies. The truth has come out and was confirmed. The Steele dossier was complete fabrication paid for by the DNC and HRC. https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/clinton-dnc-steele-dossier-fusion-gps/index.html
it’s so illegal what she did, she should have been sent to prison instead a minor fine.
https://www.hoover.org/research/why-was-steele-dossier-not-dismissed-fake
Durham testified in front of Congress detailing that it was fake .
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-russia-probe-durham-report/index.html
mire is coming out on a regular basis including Obama’s involvement, Crowd Strike’s involvement and to recently edit the page but not include that is a derelict of duty
In America there is something called lawfare, it’s real and it’s directed at Donald Trump. In America, it’s important to look at the facts. The UK has zero interest in the 1st amendment of America. Anyone from another country who wants to dive into the details of American politics should always remember that regardless of their tens of thousands of edits, must always respect “We the People”. Anything less is scandalous and abhorrent. AmelieRenee (talk) 04:31, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Can you cite the text you want to change and what it should say? TFD (talk) 04:35, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Fixing linking to this article
editRelated to an out-of-process page move discussed in 2023, I have reverted countless changes in articles where Links between Trump associates and Russian officials link was incorrectly changed wikilinks to Links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies – often also similarly incorrectly changing the visible text too (e.g. [1]). There are still countless fixes to be made and I would appreciate help. I have used WhatLinksHere tool to find erroneous articles.
@Valjean: I have used several hours in reviewing your changes and I have been unable to find even a single example where your change was supported by sources. Based on this and your comment in the referred discussion, I assume you made the changes without reviewing sources. Would you kindly revert your changes if that is the case? Mentioning also TheTimesAreAChanging, who participated in the discussion. Politrukki (talk) 19:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)