Talk:Robert David Steele/Archive 1

Archive 1

Full name

What's up with his full name being "Robert David Steele Vivas"? My somewhat educated guess, which it would be nice to confirm, is that he's part Hispanic on his mother's side, and this is a Spanish-style name.

This is certainly plausible given that he "spent his early years, two decades, resident in Latin America and Asia as the son of an oil company executive." --Saforrest 06:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

proper use of {{Fact}} tag

Please do not use the {{Fact}} tag argumentatively in order to cast aspersions on easily verified claims. If you think a claim should be sourced, do some basic research yourself first before putting in the tag. If you see a claim that is outrageous or doubtful, the {{Fact}} tag may be appropriate (or even more appropriate may be to remove the claim entirely). If you see a claim that you cannot easily verify, the {{Fact}} tag is appropriate. If you see a claim that is outright false, then remove the claim. Thanks.--csloat 01:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I strongly resent your use of the term "moronic" to refer to my request for a citation. Your name calling is a violation of Wikipedia's policy on civility. You are hereby given a formal warning for your violation.--Mr j galt 02:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I placed a {{Fact}} tag on the reference that Steele was a spy in three foreign countries for ten years since no source is cited for this statement. From which source does that assertion come from? Is Steele merely a self-described former spy? Has the CIA acknowledged that he was a spy?

Wikipedia:Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's three guiding policies. It says, in sum:

1. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources.

2. Editors adding new material to an article should cite a reputable source, or it may be removed by any editor.

3. The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it.

I am restoring the fact tag to the spy assertion statment here. If you cannot supply a legitimate source for the statement, I will delete it in accordance with wiki policy.--Mr j galt 02:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The intro mentions that Steele worked for the CIA, but the citation does not mention CIA employment at all. The citation also appears to be a press release, hardly a credible source of information. I will add a {{Fact}} tag at the CIA reference. It would be great if we could find a source where the CIA acknowledges Steele as a former employee.--Mr j galt 03:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It would be great if you stopped disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Thanks.--csloat 05:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Insisting on Wikipedia:Verifiability is not disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. If you are unable to provide a cite, I will delete the remark in accordance with Wikipedia policy.--Mr j galt 04:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Putting in fact tags when you know very well that the source is in the author's bio and resume, both cited on the article, is disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. You are not "insisting on verifiability." You are well aware the information is verified. You are just stalking articles I have edited and making changes that you believe I will object to. I will leave your silly fact tag where it is for now and let someone else remove it. The facts are established pretty clearly by clicking on his bio link or following the bio to the resume.--csloat 18:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC) By the way, if you do think the fact tag belongs somewhere, it's a good idea to spend five seconds doing a simple google search to see if you can add a citation yourself. Galt, it's a good thing we don't disagree about physics -- it would be interesting to see you putting {{Fact}} tags next to claims like "Gravitation is one of the four fundamental interactions in nature."--csloat 18:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

GS-14 - "second ranking civilian"

I have added a {{Fact}} tag to the opening sentence of the article, which states that Steele "was the second-ranking civilian (GS-14) in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988-1992." Although the GS-14 grade is the second highest GS grade (grades run from 1 to 15), having a GS-14 grade does not mean that Steele was the second highest ranking civilian in USMC intelligence. It is common for there to be many GS-14s and GS-15s in a large federal organization - both of whom are in turn outranked by SES (Senior Executive Service) personnel. If Steele was a GS-14, it is unlikely that he was the second highest ranking civilian in USMC intelligence, and if he was the second highest ranking civilian, it is unlikely that he was just a GS-14. I have been unable to trace either assertion back to sources independent of Wikipedia. 69.223.83.37 03:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Citation Added

I'm a longtime spook-buff & also an acquaintance of Robert's, I was just browsing through, saw the discussion & happened to know a place where his CIA creds are mentioned so I added it. It's my first edit anywhere, was a bitch figuring out the syntax for the footnote. Apologies if I got it wrong. --Scalefree 04:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC) Mr. Steele was NOT the second highest intelligence Marine. There were many GS 12 in the Corps and he is not one of them. From 1988 to 1992 The Director of Marine Corps intelligence was MajGen Breath having numberous Cols and LtCols subordinate to him. Mr. Steele continues to sprew in accuracies like he has always done. It is time someone set the record straight. This fool is a charloton and is not recognized by the Corps for any accomplishments. Rababy (talk) 01:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia suggestion

Hello Mr. Steele, I'm glad to see you have joined the wikipedia group. I recently started using wikipedia myself. As a recommendation, any views from persons (including yours) is best suited to be written objectively and cited from a source. For example, it is sometimes difficult for me to make a point about something because I don't have it documented anywhere, it just comes from experience (such as saying "the intelligence community has mistaken secrecy for intelligence"). Luckily for you, many of your statements can be found in your books and articles--you just need to write it in an objective tone, matter-of-fact voice, and site where the article can be retrieved via the web (external link), in wikipedia (internal link), or reference book. On a different note, I have a piece of information that I feel would be extremely valuable for you to know about, but can't disclose via these channels. Please email me at eagleelephant@gmail.com. Good to talk to you. WilsonjrWikipedia 20:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Just a friendly suggestion

I noticed you struggling as a new user to fit into the Wikipedia. I personally feel that Wikipedia can only work properly when people with a diverse array of opinions can come together to write about subjects in a NPOV manner. In any case, I hope this page is helpful to you in regards to the editing of the article about yourself Wikipedia:Autobiography. I hope you decide to stick around and learn how to work on Wikipedia with in its guidelines.

Steele Comments

I would be very glad to meet anyone that has commented on this page or the OSINT page at Wikipedia conference. You are absolutely correct, it has been a struggle, but what you may not see is that this struggle has been building for 18 years, and that a sad aspect of the struggle is that when I point at something like Wikipedia with the best of intentions, both CIA censors (or more correctly, cover-their-ass in denial over reality bureacrats) and OSINT wanna-bees (who describe themselves as pioneers when they have been nothing more that overweight sedentary journalists trying to play to the banking crowd (for real journalism see Seymour Hersh, Robert Young Pelton, Robert Kaplan, Louise Garrett, John Fialka, etc)) jump to destroy what I am trying to build. Fortunately these idiots cannot interfere with the very high quality content of www.oss.net, which I note with interest is still not listed on the OSINT page after being posted there by Arno Reuser, the foremost military intelligence librarian and OSINT practitioner in the world.

The Aspin Brown competition is documented in numerous places, including the side bar to the Forbes.com article, but this communnity is not yet ready to police people like to destructive moron that removed that as self-promotion when it was in fact 1) documented and 2) central to the 9-11 Commission eventually putting an Open Source Agency into play.

The table of contents for OSS.Net can be sorted by author, if anyone wants to take a stab at actually making this page (which I did not create and did not suggest be created), I have close to 100 relevant references. When folks like Alvin Toffler and Bruce Sterling and many others say nice things about me in writing, it just might be (my temper not-withstanding) that I am earnestly trying to do important things in the service of the public.

The name legally is Robert David Steele, and Steele is the last name. The name culturally is Robert David Steele Vivas, and that is how it appeared on my calling cards when I served three back to back tours in Latin America. Culturally, one is a bastard if both parent's surnames are not given in Latin America. In Brazil the mother's name comes first and is the primary surname, in all the other Latin American countries the father's name comes first. It is a cultural distinction that many do not understand--one defense department person recently accused me of using an alias, and I was pleased to find that his boss understood just how silly this was.

There is only one certified moron working this issue, generally on the OSINT page, no one else should construe that as applying to them. I know you are all well-intentioned educated people experimenting with an important new form of knowledge documentation. On that note, I am sad to note that CIA has fired a contractor for posting, on a private CIA blog, the fact that waterboarding is torture and torture is immoral. Do not underestimate either the totalitarian and illegal aspects of the Bush-Cheney Administration, nor the lengths that CIA will go to suppress dissent or distort reality (see my Amazon review of John Perry's "Lost History"). I continue to believe in Wikipedia, but it needs two things to really survive all these fools: a "lock down" on documents facts that mature editors can block for frivolous change without a nomination process; and a graduated scale that limits newcomers to posting new stuff but not destroying old stuff. Don't know if anyone noticed, but when I spent two days trying to make the OSINT page realistic and comprehensive, I did not destroy, I only added. Most of what I added--as the foremost proponent in the world for OSINT--has been corrupted by people with selfish motives or personal angst rather than true knowledge--the CIA people are in particular ignorant of the open source world because their security mind-set won't actually let them come out and play with internationals.

'Nuff said. After Wikipedia conference, I will drop in from time to time, but absent the two recommended changes above, I fear that I must do what I was asked to do by the Europeans in the first place, and create a private wiki that cannot be screwed up by the same fools that have refused every recommendation for intelligence reform offered up in the past 50 years.

Best wishes to all, Robert Steele 14:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

9-11 Beliefs

Steele has expressed sympathies for 9-11 conspiracy theories on his many book reviews at Amazon.com. "I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war (see my review of Jim Bamford's "Pretext for War"), and I am forced to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to indict (not necessarily convict) Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others of a neo-conservative coup d'etat and kick-off of the clash of civilizations..."

This has been trumpeted by blogs and other such websites dedicated to 9-11 conspiracies but I can't find it anywhere else at this point. It seems like it mght be relevant to the article, so if anyone can find anything about this in a reputable source, add it.

65.247.224.46 16:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

a dumb kid's message 4 'robert'

ya know.. it'd mean alot for the average kid - to know how to not be incredibly stupid. i mean.. once you feel targeted just for knowing info - it really makes people more impassioned. putting out some kinda.. um.. list of things you can actually get killed for.
some people get to the point where they figure it doesn't matter & get that much more empassioned.. and for both sides, it'd be better to have people know where things stand.
like when a 000 tells you 'eiffel tower' shuts of carnivore.. are you dead.. or just leave 'em all the fuck alone? :D

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.111.56.48 (talk) 02:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Do you care to explain why you added a link to Robert David Steele? You can answer on talk:Robert David Steele. I will revert if you do not answer. Ancheta Wis (talk) 08:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Robert Steele volunteered to be prominently featured in the documentary American Drug War: The Last White Hope. I added a link to the entry that directs to the film's website. You can read Steele's review of the film on Amazon.com by clicking here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EndTheDrugWar (talk • contribs) 19:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

missing books

I understand I am not allowed to edit my own page. First off, thanks to those who created it in the first place, it gave my second son a boost when his Dad turned out to be the only one in his class with a wikipedia page. Thank you for that.

Two books are missing: THE NEW CRAFT OF INTELLIGENCE, and most recently, COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace (both on Amazon and free at www.oss.net/CIB). There is also a book in progress that is free online in draft form, PEACE INTELLIGENCE: Assuring a Good Life for All, free at www.oss.net/Peace where I also have posted the United Nations OSINT training module.

Missing also is the fact that I am the primary author of the NATO OSINT Handbook, the primary contributor of most of the materials in the NATO OSINT Handbook, and the sole author of the new Special Operations Forces (Civil Affairs) OSINT Handbook in draft.

I may have missed it, but the Forbes article on Reinventing Intelligence with Open Source Intelligence is fairly important.

Best wishes to all, Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertDavidSteeleVivas (talk • contribs) 12:58, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Nits and Appreciation from Robert Steele

1) Second ranking civilian: at the time there were about 25 civilians in Marine Corps intelligence. The top person was John Guenther, an SES-6 who had been there forever. I was the second, as a GM-14. All others were GS-09 to GS-13. It is an accurate fact.

2) On the Drug War film, I did not volunteer. The film producer got in touch with me because of my Amazon reviews, eg. LOST HISTORY on contras, drugs, and CIA, and asked if I could come to Los Angeles for filming. I agreed provided he would pay my expenses, which he did, and I volunteered my time.

3) The COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE book is my first book to be published that does not have my name on the cover. I am turning now toward nurturing and aggregating others and although I have three chapters in this book, recommend it be listed.

If anyone wants to engage in dialog leading to improvements of this page (for example, my three most recent seminal articles on OSINT are at www.oss.net/OSINT-S, www.oss.net/OSINT-O, and at www.oss.net/HILL where my article on "The Open Source Program: Missing in Action" is being read by virtually everyone either planning to attend or deciding not to attend the DNI OSINT conference

I also wrote the Joint Military Intelligence Training Center Open Source Handbook, and the Special Operations Forces Open Source Handbook, as well as the NATO Open Source Handbook, and will create stubs for the first two, should anyone wish to link to them.

My email is bear xxx oss dot net

Best wishes,

RobertDavidSteeleVivas (talk) 23:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia activism section

User OSC Flunkee (contributions limited to open source intelligence and 3 related articles) and Bear bs (similar limited edit history, and a Robert David Steele-bashing username to boot) created a section about Robert Steeles Wikipedia history. It was deemed unencyclopedic by RMHED and myself, but both removals were reverted by two IP addresses. So lets figure it out. What makes this section appropriate for this article? Porkrind (talk) 23:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• The content isn't even verifiable, as there is no evidence that the Wikipedia accounts referenced were actually controlled by Robert David Steele. So it fails WP:BLP, WP:V and WP:UNDUE. According to WHOIS the last IP reversion was from a computer at Biogen Idec. RMHED (talk) 23:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• It was reinstated again by the Biogen Idec node and I reverted again. Is this the point one asks for protection? Porkrind (talk) 20:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Not really at a level that requires protection yet. RMHED (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Just for the record, I OSC Flunkee didn't revert any of the content removed by Porkrind or RMHED, although I did change my original posting with a more balanced section. Porkrind, so my contributions are less valid because I post on open source intelligence issues which is an area I know well? I'm not sure that's fair criticism. In any case, I would say its very easy to verify that Mr. Steele was the individual who controlled RobertDavidSteeleVivas and related sockpuppets - just read the posts! Don't they reinstate links to his specific website and contain harsh criticisms of the removal of his self-promoting links? You can also see that the wording and commentary is identical to what's on his website. In fact, he has mentioned my removal of his self-promoting links on his website, so clearly its one and the same person. You'll also note that in this particular page, it is Mr. Steele who attempts to settle the "fact" that he was the second highest ranking intelligence person in the Marine Corps as a GS-14 (a statement I find hard to believe). Why is this posting accepted as from Mr. Steele but all others not?

I do not have a vendetta against Mr. Steele, but I do have a vendetta against his efforts at self-promotion here on Wikipedia. A careful review of my edits to the open source intelligence page shows that I haven't deleted his additions to the page (or any other page), unless it was: a) lacking in sourcing, b) they were editoral comments, or c) they linked back to his website. I also believe that Mr. Steele's actions on Wikipedia should be part of the record. RMHED, if I use your same logic about not navel gazing on Wikipedia as discussed on talk, shouldn't we then delete Jimbo Wales page on Wikipedia? OSC Flunkee (talk) 01:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• I think Jimmy Wales just scrapes through the notability guidelines. As the Founder/Co-Founder of Wikipedia his activities on and off Wikipedia attract media attention, shocking I know. RMHED (talk) 01:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Not so fast, the issue is whether "Wikipedia navel gazing" is legitimate or not as you said - don't change the subject to notability that's a separate thing. I am just taking your argument to its logical conclusion that if Mr. Steele's Wikipedia activities aren't post-worthy on Wikipedia, then neither are anyone else's. OSC Flunkee (talk) 02:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
    • As soon as Steele's Wikipedia activities are covered by reliable secondary sources then inclusion of the coverage would likely be justified. Until such time, they are just navel gazing. RMHED (talk) 02:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
• Your relatively few edits, all contained within a very close scope, makes it easy to believe you are either a puppet or on wikipedia for the purpose of executing a vendetta. I think we can both realize there is no way to verify either way. I understand you have not reverted removals.

I will not contend that Steeles edits have been in wikipedias best interests; this point is irrelevant, as is his sockpuppetry (does it really count as sockpuppetry if the account names are obviously the same person?). The question at hand is wether the information about that passes WP:BLP, WP:V and WP:UNDUE. Porkrind (talk) 02:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

disclaimer

Boy, what a hot-bed of discussion this talk page and this article is--I had no idea what I was getting into when I bumped into this article. For the record: my edits were to unverified statements, trivial statements, statements that weren't verified by the reference, and to minor matters like ALL-CAPS TITLES and such. I am not a sock, nor a puppet, nor an opponent of open-source intelligence, nor a proponent of open-source intelligence, I am not working for the CIA (or against it), I am not a believer in 9/11 conspiracies (though I do not believe everything my government tells me). I have not been associated with Mr. Steele in the past, nor have I been dissociated from him. I have not been involved in a conspiracy against him or his career, though I have to admit I also have no interest in furthering his career (on Wikipedia or anywhere else). My edits were good-faith edits by a grammarian with a thirst for the facts, just the facts, ma'am. Drmies (talk) 03:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Alvin Toffler

"War and Anti-War" (1995) Warner Books ISBN 0-446-60259-0, very intersting on biography "Robert D. Steel.--82.56.112.97 (talk) 22:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

CIA

It's claimed that he was a spy for the CIA, can anyone prove that he was involved in the CIA at all? Bumblebritches57 (talk) 19:28, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Libel

I am appalled at the lack of quality control on this page. Never mind that it will never approach www.robertdavidsteele.com for range accuracy.

Concern #1: slandering my integrity by suggesting that I am lying about being a former clandestine case officer. That is a matter of public record in various indirect forms, CIA does not normally issue a letter certifying this. It should be enough that my first two books on intelligence have forewords by the past and then serving Chairs of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and that my biographies are explictly approved by the CIA's Publications Review Board, you are welcome to email them directly at prb@ucia.gov.

Concern #2: demeaning my body of work by placing emphasis on a few (out of over 18,000 posts http://www.phibetaiota.net/journal/ by over 80 contributing editors http://www.phibetaiota.net/authors/ ) posts that raise legitimate questions about Sandy Hook, the Boston Bombing, and 9/11. I would observe that my name is generally not directly associated with those posts but I respect my contributing editors and it would never occur to me to mock, censor, ignore, or otherwise try to marginalize those concerns, are your latest "editor" has done. I realize no one there cares about what I have done in a constructive way, but it would certainly be nice if some responsible person cared to focus on my ten books, many articles, cahpters, briefings, testimony, the 7,500 mid-career officers from over 66 countries I have trained, the fact that I am the top Amazon reviewer for non-fiction reading in 98 categories you can see here: http://www.phibetaiota.net/reviews/

This just makes me sick. If there are any adults with the ability to ban the person slandering me from touching this page, and reverting to the incomplete but accurate earlier version, I would be most appreciative.

Robert Steele — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.139.15 (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps WP:BLP might protect Robert Steele's reputation. And this article.

To all editors: any suggestions?

If we get no constructive ideas, that is data in itself. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 02:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Due Diligence and Glad to See Entire Piece Deleted

Thank you, SineBot. I agonized over this all night. The person who is libeling me (slander is spoken) is not an intelligence professional and has not done their due diligence, they are simply a troll with an opinion. Anyone doing due diligence would have noted that as recently at November 2014 I was the keynote speaker at the annual meeting of the Ecuadorean intelligence community

http://www.phibetaiota.net/espanol/ [with photos in-country] http://www.phibetaiota.net/2015/01/2014-steele-on-intelligence-in-ecuador-english/

I note with appreciation this guidance from Wikipedia that has not yet been acted upon: "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."

An intelligent person with integrity would have checked out my full bio http://robertdavidsteele.com and noticed the June 2014 profile of me in The Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/jun/19/open-source-revolution-conquer-one-percent-cia-spy as well as the profiles by Alvin TOffler, by Kent Myers in a book, by Dawn in Computers Year 2000, and by Anthony Kimery in Homeland Security Today.

Someone with an interest in the historical record would have examined my books including jacket blurbs from former global intelligence leaders including Dick Kerr (Deputy Director of Central Intelligence) and LtGen Patrick Hughes (Director, Defense Intelligence Agency).

Easy to do due diligence would have shown my articles at http://www.phibetaiota.net/category/archives/chapters/directory-list/ including bios in the American Intelligence Journal and elsewhere, my many public appearances including Hackers on Planet Earth, my many interviews including PBS and more reecently Yale Politic, Alex Jones, Max Kaiser, etcetera, http://www.phibetaiota.net/category/archives/briefings/directory-list-briefings/

This page about me has always been terrible, I personally think it should be deleted or protected. No one cares about me today because i am a proponent for the truth at any cost lowering all other costs, and electoral reform, and those are the two most deadly weapons against the 1% -- marginalizing me is good for them.

Whatever this troll's motives, they are libelous, despicable, and I would be glad to see them blocked. Delete the page if you wish. If you want my help on this talk page, I will gladly offer it. Just take a look at http://robertdavidsteele.com for everything that could be but is not on this page. The opening paragraph that I would consider honest is below:

Robert David Steele (born July 16, 1952) is the son of an oil engineer who grew up overseas and returned to the USA to become a Marine Corps infantry officer and then a clandestine service case officer for the CIA. He went on to create the Marine Corps Intelligence Center, resigning in 1993 to lead a global campaign to redirect spies and secrecy toward Open Source Intelligence (OSINT). Within that campaign, he wrote the OSINT Handbooks for NATO, DIA, and Special Operations. A prolific writer, both published by others and self-published, he is a champion of the idea that the truth at any cost will lower all other costs, and strongly against wasted resources and unnecessary risk in relation to spying and secrecy. In 2006 he created Earth Intelligence Network http://www.earth-intelligence.net, an accredited non-profit that offers a model for citizen (public) intelligence and a blog Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog http://www.phibetaiota.net. In 2011 he helped Occupy explore electoral reform. In 2012 he ran briefly for the Reform Party's nomination for President, creating a web site, We the People Reform Coalition (http://bigbatusa.org) with four major ideas for restoring integrity to the US electoral process, government, economy, and society. Also in 2012 his book, The Open Source Everything Manifesto: Transparency, Truth, and Trust was published, creating a new meme, Open Source Everything, that is now morphing into open source everything engineering, a new holistic discipline. In 2015 he published a Kindle book, Open Power: Electoral Reform Act of 2015 - Open Source Activist Tool-Kit. He is seeking employment and globally mobile.

68.98.139.15 (talk) 11:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate the elimination of the libel.

My understanding is that an individual should not be editing their own page. I personally think this page is marginal at best -- for example not including links to the Amazon pages for my 10 or so books -- but I have never sought to improve it for self-aggrandizement.

If anyone wishes to ask any question of me at any time, I am readily available and happy to answer and to provide supporting links.

My primary bio with testimonials, profiles, production, and video links remains robertdavidsteele.com.

Very respectfully, Robert Steele 68.98.139.15 (talk) 14:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Cleanup

I have removed a long list of external links, see WP:ELYES. - Cwobeel (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Clean up? Or marginalization?

I consider this page despicably marginalized. Your "clean up" persuades me that there are several of you committed to making this page as useless as possible.

Why not just delete it? It is next to worthless in its present state.

Robert Steele 68.98.139.15 (talk) 21:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps a separate section on the subject's gut. It ALMOST deserves a page of its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.213.142.170 (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Disappointed in Wikipedia

This page remains a disgrace. http://robertdavidsteele.com is now more popular than this page because it has more substance. I pray for the day when Wikpedia can be a symbol of clarity, integrity, and utility.

Best wishes to all of you, Robert David Steele

2600:8806:6200:350:24AA:5335:E11B:E846 (talk) 00:07, 13 May 2017 (UTC)