Talk:James E. Webb: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 17:44, 12 June 2021 editColin M (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators12,441 edits →Webb and homosexuality: examples of other sources← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:34, 30 September 2021 edit undoSamboy (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users7,613 edits →Webb and homosexuality: NASA investigated and didn’t find a “smoking gun” (I haven’t either; the best evidence I’ve seen that Webb ever did anything was a memo telling him to attend a meeting about the “Gay scare”)Next edit →
Line 136:		Line 136:
	::::::What are these "several other sources"? Something that is just mentioned in op-eds does not get a free ride in Misplaced Pages until it turns out that, oops, it was RECENTISM, and it gets cut. RECENTISM precludes inclusion unless and until it gets better coverage. ] also requires a consensus ''to'' include something, or else it stays out. <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 03:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)		::::::What are these "several other sources"? Something that is just mentioned in op-eds does not get a free ride in Misplaced Pages until it turns out that, oops, it was RECENTISM, and it gets cut. RECENTISM precludes inclusion unless and until it gets better coverage. ] also requires a consensus ''to'' include something, or else it stays out. <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 03:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
	:::::::So there are of course the "Some people said X" blog posts that came shortly after the op-ed (), but I won't dwell on those since they don't tell us much. But there's also, for example, which is currently cited in the article. It was published 2 months after the Scientific American op-ed, and covers the issue at a fairly in-depth level (rather than just laundering the original SA op-ed). And of some reporting (a few weeks after the op-ed) on the telescope launch date which includes two paragraphs in passing about the name controversy. Interestingly, it mentions that the agency is actually actively investigating Webb's involvement in the State Dept. program, seemingly in response to the calls for renaming. This is also mentioned in (under the heading "NASA Considering Case for Renaming Webb Telescope"). The fact that NASA is seemingly taking action in response to the name-change advocates suggests to me that this is not just some flash-in-the-pan fringe view that's unworthy of even mentioning. ] (]) 17:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)		:::::::So there are of course the "Some people said X" blog posts that came shortly after the op-ed (), but I won't dwell on those since they don't tell us much. But there's also, for example, which is currently cited in the article. It was published 2 months after the Scientific American op-ed, and covers the issue at a fairly in-depth level (rather than just laundering the original SA op-ed). And of some reporting (a few weeks after the op-ed) on the telescope launch date which includes two paragraphs in passing about the name controversy. Interestingly, it mentions that the agency is actually actively investigating Webb's involvement in the State Dept. program, seemingly in response to the calls for renaming. This is also mentioned in (under the heading "NASA Considering Case for Renaming Webb Telescope"). The fact that NASA is seemingly taking action in response to the name-change advocates suggests to me that this is not just some flash-in-the-pan fringe view that's unworthy of even mentioning. ] (]) 17:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
			:::::::: Well, it looks like . The conclusion: A NASA director, ] “hasn't seen anything that convinces him that Webb was directly involved in demanding a purge of gay government officials or carrying it out”. ] (]) 16:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:34, 30 September 2021

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Spaceflight High‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Webb's military rank

The recent edit to Webb's rank in the infobox needs a citation in the article text, which must be changed if necessary. While 2nd lieut. is the entry-level officer grade, did he actually rise four levels in two years (-> lieut. -> capt. -> major -> lt. col.)? Surely his military history must be documented somewhere. JustinTime55 (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

And? -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Webb was a 33rd Degree Scottish Rite Freemason

I added the following to the article... Webb was a 33rd Degree member of Scottish Rite Freemasonry. ref. Ancient Aliens - The NASA Connection, History Channel 2, 2012 - Brad Watson, Miami 71.196.11.183 (talk) 09:17, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Done -- Nicely done. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:04, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Quote about homosexuals was mis-attributed to Webb

This is an explanation of the edits that I made on July 10, 2015, which Pjefts reverted. I have reverted his reversion. It appears that the reversion was based on the fact that in addition to adding a lot of material, I deleted a quote about homosexuals that had been attributed to Webb. According to the source material originally cited in support of that quote, the quote came from the Hoey report, not from Webb.

The citation listed by the original editor in support of this quote (Edsal, Toward Stonewall, page 276-77,) actually reads:

  "The politics of anti-Communism dated back to the beginnings of the Cold War in 1947-48 and were first broadened to include homosexuals in early 1950, when an under-secretary of state testified to a Senate committee that most of the government employees dismissed for moral turpitude were in fact homosexual. Sensing that they had uncovered a potentially disastrous weakness in the Truman administration, Republicans took up the issue with enthusiasm, and Democrats, suddenly placed on the defensive, felt compelled to follow suit. The Senate appointed a committee to investigate the employment of homosexuals in the federal government. Though cautious in estimating the number of "sex perverts" in government service, the committee report, issued in December 1950, nonetheless painted an alarming picture of their character, their influence, and their potential threat to the nation's security.
  "It is generally believed," the report noted, "that those who engage in overt acts of perversion lack the emotional stability of normal persons."

It seems a stretch to attribute a quote in the report directly to the testimony of the undersecretary of state (James Webb.)

The Hoey report itself, available at: https://mattachinesocietywashingtondc.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/document141.pdf, does not list Webb as a co-author. Indeed, Webb worked for the State Department and so would not have directly contributed any text to a Senate committee report anyway.

In the book Lavender Scare by David Johnson, on page 101 to 109 there is a detailed discussion of the Hoey committee and its report. That source establishes that the report was mostly written by Francis Flanagan (Chief Counsel to Senator Hoey.) On page 104, Johnson says that Webb met with Truman to devise a strategy for dealing with the Hoey committee, and that Truman then assigned the task of White House liaison to the committee to Stephen Springarm (not Webb.) Truman's goal was to contain the political damage, and they managed to keep the committee's proceedings in closed session (thus avoiding a media circus like the McCarthy hearings.) The White House also attempted to portray homosexuals in government as a medical issue rather than a security risk (in an attempt to downplay the issue,) although they weren't very successful at that.

The bottom line is that attributing that quote to Webb is historically inaccurate -- the statement was almost certainly written by Francis Flanagan.

The previous version of this page, in which is appeared that Webb's main goals during his tenure at State was to persecute homosexuals gave undue emphasis to his role.

According to Webb's biographer (Lambright), Webb's main objectives during his time at the Department of State were: reorganizing the department to be closer to the White House, struggling with the new Department of Defense over the appropriate budget for containing the Soviet Union, and dealing with the Korean War. Although the Edsal and Johnson references establish that Webb was involved in the State department purges at the level of briefing Congress and Truman, he was not the instigator of those purges (they started in 1947 and he joined State in 1949,) and they don't seem to be a big part of what he focused on. Lambright does not even mention it in the biography.

Nf7443 (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Further sourced research has shown this to be the case. I removed the two sentences that reference the misquotes. https://hmoluseyi.medium.com/was-nasas-historic-leader-james-webb-a-bigot-131c821d5f12 —Ben Brockert (42) 15:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Blog posts on Medium are not reliable sources. (An academic peer review of that post would probably interrogate its portrayal of Humelsine's memo, for starters, and point out that Webb passed Humelsine's material directly to Senator Hoey .) As it stands, the current article underplays what the cited source says about Webb's role regarding Truman and the Hoey committee. XOR'easter (talk) 19:01, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

"unless the author is a subject-matter expert", which is the case here. —Ben Brockert (42) 14:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

He's an astrophysicist, not a historian. In any case, that paragraph has been rewritten, and the rewrite is being discussed below. XOR'easter (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

He is an astrophysicist but he says clearly in the Medium article that he worked closely with NASA historians and archivists, and a history PhD student at University of Alabama in Huntsville. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarkEnergy1998 (talk • contribs)

NASA section copyvio template.

I removed the copyvio template for the section on his NASA career. The template had stated the section appeared to be a copy and paste from a NASA website. NASA is a government agency, and works produced by government agencies are not protected by copyright law:

  About U.S. Government Works
  A United States government work is prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government as part of that person's official duties.
  It is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
   reproduce the work in print or digital form;
   create derivative works;
   perform the work publicly;
   display the work;
   distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.

Mmyers1976 (talk) 15:57, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:James E. Webb/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.

Only a minor point noticed in the article. But, in the interest in accuracy, and not generating any confusion. In NASA parlance, MSFC denotes Marshal Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The article could cause one to assume that when speaking of the race to the moon, Houston's Manned Space Flight Center was the critical link, when the critical problem to be solved was "How do we get there?". This was the "problem" dealt with at the Marshal Center and resolved with the development of the Saturn V. Ccozelos (talk) 18:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 18:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 19:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on James E. Webb. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120417091750/http://www.ncmuseumofhistory.org/collateral/articles/f03.tarheels.in.space.pdf to http://www.ncmuseumofhistory.org/collateral/articles/f03.tarheels.in.space.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 01:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20011116140952/http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/oralhistory.hom/webb-j/webb.asp to http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/oralhistory.hom/WEBB-J/webb.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 10:33, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Webb and homosexuality

For now I am removing the re-written section on Webb and homosexuality. This is an attempt to link Webb to anti-homosexual policies during the 1950s. Webb may very well have been actively involved in rooting out gay people from government agencies, but that is the work of historians and investigative reports; it is not the work of Wikipedians (see: WP:PSTS). In the current paragraph which I have removed, the part that links Webb to direct involvement comes from a primary source, the "Memorandum from Stephen J. Spingarn with Note". While that document seems to implicate Webb on this issue, that assessment needs to be made by a historian or investigative reporter. In other words, it needs to come from a secondary source. A historian studying this subject may know more about this document than we do, and may better understand the context. I am not saying that XOR'easter doesn't understand the context or the document. I am saying XOR'easter is not allowed by Misplaced Pages to make those judgments. Those judgments can only come from secondary, reliable sources.

I, too, have been looking for sources to connect Webb to these allegations. I have also reached out to the editor who made the claim in this article originally (I haven't heard back yet from that editor). If and when a secondary reliable source can be found, then and only then can a paragraph like this exist in the article.

I hope my explanation makes sense. If it doesn't, please respond here. Sincerely, Kingturtle = (talk) 04:08, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Webb joined the State Department during McCarthyism, and the Department was under considerable pressure from Congress to root out communists, anarchists and others deemed un-American and a security risk. Webb met with Truman in 1950 to discuss the administration's response to the Congressional hearings. As Undersecretary of State, Webb acted as intermediary between Truman and the Congressional subcommittee led by Senator Clyde R. Hoey that investigated "the employment of homosexuals in the Federal workforce." Carlisle Humelsine, an official in the State Department, prepared a memorandum stating that homosexuals were "characterized by emotional instability" and "unsuitable for employment" in that Department. The memorandum referred to unnamed "studies" that related the "rise of homosexuality with the accompanying decline of the Egyptian, Greek and Roman Empires". Webb then passed the material that had been prepared for him on to Hoey. Although the White House was not politically able to quell Congressional fervor, it implemented a strategy to emphasize the medical aspects and play down the security concerns of homosexuals in the government.

The Lavender Scare describes Webb's role as go-between for Truman and Hoey's subcommittee. I'm not a fierce devotee of the paragraph as written, but it's definitely a usable source; it and the Shibusawa article justify everything here, though of course phrasing is up for debate. XOR'easter (talk) 06:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I've been searching Newspapers.com for anything at all linking Webb to this, but haven't found anything yet. I am still trying. Kingturtle = (talk) 21:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I am doubtful that contemporaneous newspapers would have much on the topic. The best references, judging from what we've seen so far, would probably be academic books and articles studying the events retrospectively. XOR'easter (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Kingturtle, XOR'easter, and Randy Kryn: (and others): FWIW: seems this topic may be related to a recent (1 March 2021) issue of Scientific American which was added to the main James E. Webb article (but reverted several times by an ip editor without discussion or explanation on the talk-page) as follows:

Copied from: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=James_E._Webb&diff=prev&oldid=1010170807
In March 2021, a commentary in Scientific American urges NASA to rename the James Webb Space Telescope due to Webb's efforts while a NASA administrator, disclosed in 2015, to implement governmental policies in place at the time to purge LGBT individuals from the federal workforce.
NOTE: My original edit was subsequently improved by editor User:Randy Kryn => https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=James_E._Webb&diff=1010225981&oldid=1010170807

Hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 23:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

References

Executive Session Hearing of the Subcommittee on Investigations. Series: Committee Papers, 1789–2015. 1950. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
^ Johnson, David K. (2004). The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government. University of Chicago Press. pp. 104–107.
Shibusawa, Naoko (September 2012). "The Lavender Scare and Empire: Rethinking Cold War Antigay Politics*: The Lavender Scare and Empire". Diplomatic History. 36 (4): 723–752. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7709.2012.01052.x.
Memorandum from Stephen J. Spingarn with Note. File Unit: Sex Perversion , 1945 - 1953. June 29, 1950.
^ Prescod-Weinstein, Chanda; Tuttle, Sarah; Walkowicz, Lucianne; Nord, Brian (1 March 2021). "NASA Needs to Rename the James Webb Space Telescope - The successor to the Hubble honors a man who took part in the effort to purge LGBT people from the federal workforce". Scientific American. Retrieved 3 March 2021.

I read the Scientific American opinion piece. The piece itself accuses Webb of either being "complicated" or "complicit". This Misplaced Pages article claims that he made "efforts...to implement policies". The authors of the opinion piece don't make such a claim. Misplaced Pages distorts the facts, or actually creates facts not in the record. Nor is the piece is noteworthy, imho. Any reference to it should be removed.98.21.218.134 (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

The statement currently in the article seems a fair summary of what the opinion piece says (({tq|Webb’s role as a facilitator of homophobic policy discussions}}, etc.). Doubtless tweaks are possible, but I don't see the argument for removing it. XOR'easter (talk) 21:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Removed section as per Kingturtle ='s comments. Please stop edit warring to keep this section in without secondary sources. Ergzay (talk) 11:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

The comment at the beginning of this thread is from January, while the text in question was added in March and has been restored by multiple users . And the dispute has continued to attract attention and generate commentary , which counts as a secondary source. Without an explicit consensus against it, I'd say it should stay, with the secondary source added. Drbogdan, thoughts? XOR'easter (talk) 14:52, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Also pinging Randy Kryn, who edited the text for clarity and brevity back in March . XOR'easter (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. My edit was mainly to change the word 'report' to 'commentary', which seemed to more accurately describe the journalistic category of the piece. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:49, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, "commentary" is better. XOR'easter (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't agree with including this. WP:Secondary sources have to be reliable, and an article that is clearly an op-ed in Slate and dripping with name-change advocacy is not some sort of unbiased news report or academic work. As that opinion piece even notes, an astrophysicist (just as much of a subject matter expert as any of these other individuals) wrote a Medium post expressing a contrary view. Op-eds aren't any more fact checked than Medium posts. The fact that this only has attention from op-eds tells us that it does not belong and is WP:UNDUE, same as is always done in such situations. Misplaced Pages is not for advocacy. Crossroads 03:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

I think the WP:V issue is a red herring. The Scientific American piece doesn't need to be reliable for the purpose of establishing that Webb was involved in the purge of homosexuals from the federal government, because that's not what is being claimed in wiki-voice in the at-issue text. Rather, the text is saying "someone wrote a commentary in Scientific American claiming that Webb was involved in the Lavender scare and advocating for renaming the telescope for that reason". So yeah, of course the cited source is an opinion piece "dropping with name-change advocacy", rather than an unbiased news report - the text makes no secret of this. The only relevant question here is whether mentioning the commentary is giving it WP:UNDUE weight. Given that this view has been given space in several other sources in the months since the SA piece, I'm inclined to think that a one-sentence mention is appropriate (and it's definitely more suited to this article rather than James Webb Space Telescope). If a year from now it turns out the issue was never mentioned again in any RS, then yeah, maybe it should be jettisoned as WP:RECENTISM. Colin M (talk) 16:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Sounds fair to me. XOR'easter (talk) 19:36, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

What are these "several other sources"? Something that is just mentioned in op-eds does not get a free ride in Misplaced Pages until it turns out that, oops, it was RECENTISM, and it gets cut. RECENTISM precludes inclusion unless and until it gets better coverage. WP:ONUS also requires a consensus to include something, or else it stays out. Crossroads 03:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

So there are of course the "Some people said X" blog posts that came shortly after the op-ed (e.g.), but I won't dwell on those since they don't tell us much. But there's also, for example, the Slate piece which is currently cited in the article. It was published 2 months after the Scientific American op-ed, and covers the issue at a fairly in-depth level (rather than just laundering the original SA op-ed). And here's an example of some reporting (a few weeks after the op-ed) on the telescope launch date which includes two paragraphs in passing about the name controversy. Interestingly, it mentions that the agency is actually actively investigating Webb's involvement in the State Dept. program, seemingly in response to the calls for renaming. This is also mentioned in this American Physics Institute bulletin (under the heading "NASA Considering Case for Renaming Webb Telescope"). The fact that NASA is seemingly taking action in response to the name-change advocates suggests to me that this is not just some flash-in-the-pan fringe view that's unworthy of even mentioning. Colin M (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, it looks like NASA performed an investigation. The conclusion: A NASA director, Sean O'Keefe “hasn't seen anything that convinces him that Webb was directly involved in demanding a purge of gay government officials or carrying it out”. Samboy (talk) 16:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Categories: