Talk:Jim Mattis

Panetta editorial
The section on Mattis' appointment to U.S. Central Command states, "According to Leon Panetta, the Obama administration did not place much trust in Mattis because he was perceived as too eager for a military confrontation with Iran."

This is clearly editorializing. Not only that, the claim that Mattis was not trusted because the Obama administration thought he was too much of a warmonger is contradicted by the fact that he was appointed by Pres. Obama to lead two wars.

But according to GrandMaster Editor Muboshgu it's totally fine because it's clearly noted as "According to Panetta." Well, golly, I guess we can just add anyone's opinion about what they think someone else's opinion is about Mattis. You know...as long as we say who it's "According to," right?

Again, this is an editorial, clearly political biased comment and in the context it's given does not belong in this biographical article. I would think that someone who claims to be a "Grandmaster Editor" would realize that distinction. It seems like a lot of people are more concerned about pushing their personal point of views into many Wikipedia articles than the integrity of those articles.

39.7.53.216 (talk) 03:27, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Date of birth
Where did Mattis serve in Vietnam? If he enlisted at 19 in 1969, it would have been difficult for him to avoid Vietnam, and as a future careerist he wouldn't have wanted to avoid it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.233.118 (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Does anyone know his date of birth? I've had a look on the internet, but can't find anything. Palefire 08:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have a few books that go into some depth on him but good luck finding his DOB. He is not the most public of individuals so it would be very tough to find.--Looper5920 11:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Mandatory retirement for this service is at 62 (with an unclear special case that can extend to 64). Subject's profile indicates he would have been approx 22 in 1972. So it's clearly c. 1951. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 12:47, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

What I do know is that his date of birth as reported (Sept 8, 1950) is incorrect even though it is cited from a transcript of a Congressional Hearing. The transcript is wrong. Further research should be done by the person who insists on publishing that date. Mark Walker, and the management at The North County Times in San Diego have an audio recording published online(and since taken down) on June 19, 2007 where Mattis states that he is 57 on that day. If he was born on Sept 8, 1950 he would have said he was 56. The person who insists upon publishing incorrect data won't go to the trouble to research this thoroughly, he depends on one source only, believing that source to be indisputable. I have a copy of the audio file(s)I speak of. The North County Times will probably release or sell for a small price said audio file(s) to anyone who wants to do thorough research (North County Times Newsroom 760-740-5425).

Also, Mattis' Mandatory Retirement Date (MRD) as reported in the same congressional transcript says "MRD: 1 July 12." That date also supports his birth date being in mid-June 1950. Mandatory retirement age is 62. If he had been born on Sept 8, 1950 he would only be 61 on the MRD reported. The transcript is wrong. The research is incomplete.

SamWest314 Samwest314 (talk) 15:57, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * From Encyclopedia Britannica: "James Mattis, (born Sept. 8, 1950, Pullman, Wash., U.S.), U.S. Marine Corps general who was appointed by Pres. Barack Obama to serve..." (Source) Jokestress (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Pantano deemed innocent?
I reverted this edit.

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 03:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Why is this rant here? Under the guise of undoing a simple reversion you felt the need to write a small novella on your take on what happened in the Pantano case, the rules of war, use of WP, etc...?  Does this crap need to be on Mattis' page.  I would say no.  I am going to remove it unless you can provide a reason for its existence.--Looper5920 04:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why was this explanation there? What we sometimes see on the wikipedia is truthiness at work.  The excision I reverted on January 11th was excised again two weeks later.  The passage that keeps getting excised does not use inflammatory language, cites authoritative, verifiable sources — and yet no doubt well-meaning wikipedians feel they can excise it, without research, calling it an "outright lie".  I think we are seeing an archetypical example of "truthiness".  We are encountering editors who don't feel the need to research their edits when they read something that feels untrue.
 * I am sure you didn't mean to be give the appearance of defending editors making edits based on what they feel is true, and agree with me that editors should exercise some care to verify that what they feel is true, actually is true, before they make edits, correct?
 * Cheers! —  Geo Swan 22:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Restoring paragraph that is not "an outright lie"
In this edit another wikipedian removed the bulk of a paragraph with the edit summary: "rm outright lie" Pantano did empty two magazines into his unarmed prisoners. Pantano did scrawl Mattis's slogan over the corpses. So I restored the passage.
 * They didn't say:
 * Whether they were disputing if Pantano emptied two magazines into two unarmed prisoners.
 * Whether they were disputing if Pantano scrawled Mattis's slogan as a warning over the corpses of the prisoners he just killed.
 * Whether they were disputing that the slogan became central to the investigation into Pantano's actions.

Cheers! — Geo Swan 04:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic statement
This sentence is opinion, not fact, and it's vague to boot: "Reaction to Mattis' comments aside, however, the General has displayed a deep understanding of the nature of war, an understanding often lost on those of similar rank." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.5.88 (talk) 01:17, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

NPOV
"bloodthirsty and widely seen as disgustingly racist comments aside" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.147.14 (talk) 02:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Awards
About Oct 2008, an anon added the légion d'honneur to the list of Mattis's awards. Recently, another anon felt the need to remove it. I'm really not sure who is right, and so far, there is no evidence to show that he was actually a recipient of the award. However, I have undone the removal because it messed up the table a bit. Can anyone else find a ref for this French award being given to Mattis? If not, I'll remove it in a few weeks or so.  bahamut0013  words deeds   11:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll remove it until someone has a reference for it, because I couldn't find one. claudevsq (talk) 14:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Harrison Ford portrayal removed
I removed the line about his upcoming portrayal by Harrison Ford, as the reference was from Dec. 2004 and there is no entry about this on Mr. Ford's imdb page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.158.5.82 (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, it's hard to tell what's going on with this film. It drew some criticism back in 2004 and 2005, but they filmed enough to release a trailer. I can't find any notice that it was cancelled, but there doesn't seem to be any more evidence that production went forward either. The release date was slated to be 2009... not much time left. I suppose we can leave it out until we see more evidence that the project didn't die silently, or is mired in development hell.  bahamut0013  words deeds 05:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Politics
I have now multiple times removed content about people trying to ascribe political aspirations to the subject. Take a look at the sources: Townhall.com, Daily Caller, and Lifezette. Lifezette isn't a reliable source so that can be thrown out but even so, it's the same as the others. This politics season you have a lot of hack writers trying to fill inches on magazines and websites. No political candidate has named Mattis for anything. Mattis himself hasn't said he's going to run for anything. These websites are just part of the echo chamber of the hopeful audience trying to put Mattis into the political arena. None of this content belongs. Anyone that disagrees need to consider reading these websites critically. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 16:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Just because someone includes Mattis in their personal wishlist for Trump's cabinet is a far cry from Trump actually considering him for such a position. It also does not equate to popular opinion for such an appointment. Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content. KMJKWhite (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Please stop adding your personal interpretation of the Natl Security Act to the lede. First, the lede is supposed to summarize what's in the body of the article, not introduce material. Add this info to the body of the article and develop it there. Second, what you're adding is unreferenced. Also, the article is about the subject. Whether or not the law allows Mattis to be SECDEF is a small discussion point that shouldn't be in the lede section. Finally, you have to have consensus to add material once you've been reverted. You don't have consensus and you would do well not to edit war.  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 14:27, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Viet Nam
Any explanation as to why he didn't serve in Viet Nam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.43.173 (talk) 21:40, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Assumption: he entered service in 1969; by the time he was in a position to be assigned there, the USMC had drawn down their commitment significantly. It appears, reading between the lines, that the earliest he might have served there was 1972, by which time the Marines were pretty much out of straight combat roles, and were limited to scattered advisory roles, and support in Saigon. Probably just luck of the draw, and nothing more, is my guess. LiberTarHeel (talk) 00:01, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Those of us who were draftees were "in a position" to serve in Vietnam 5 months after entry into the military. So a person who wanted a military career could certainly have gotten into combat just as quickly as those who didn't even want to be in the military. Which leaves the question (not a partisan one) why he didn't serve in the biggest war of his lifetime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.233.118 (talk) 22:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Short answer: He was in school.  Long answer:  Mattis graduated from Columbia High School in 1968 (I presume in May or June). Mattis enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve in 1969 as part of ROTC, meaning he volunteered.  He earned a B.A. degree in history from Central Washington University in 1971.  He was commissioned a second lieutenant through the Reserve Officers' Training Corps on January 1, 1972.  This tells me he blasted through college in 3 to 3-1/2 years, probably taking classes year-round.  3rd Marine Division departed South Vietnam in November 1969 for Okinawa.  As a lieutenant, Mattis served as a rifle and weapons platoon commander in the 3rd Marine Division in Okinawa, Japan.  That takes him through 1976, beyond the end of the Vietnam War.  Does anyone else have any further questions with respect to where and why General Mattis served during Vietnam? All of this is in the article except 3rd MARDIV's location, which came from that article.Clepsydrae (talk) 14:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Premature appointulation?
LiberTarHeel (talk) 23:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)It appears that Mattis' appointment as SecDef is not a fact at all. I would suggest either removing it or at least wording it to read more like the rumor that it appears to be. His Press Sec has issued a statement that's pretty definitive in this regard.
 * Based on the edits and notes I've seen here, the only effective way to keep this from happening is to restrict editing. That's been done. As for being definitive, the official announcement will be 5 December. Of course, there are obstacles to him being approved, so this will be going on for a while.--KMJKWhite (talk) 02:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

FWA
Not to be confused with Fraud Waste and Abuse - a former 4 star speakers bureau with many Wikipedia articles (FWA) but none reflecting http://fwaconsultants.homestead.com - in lieu of an article some explanation might be appropriate in this article. - 173.20.148.109 (talk) 04:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Political Islam
Washington Post recently detailed Mattis' views on political Islam or well at the least questioning it as useful to USA. I wonder why no one has added it here. 27.255.221.131 (talk) 09:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It's WP:UNDUE. Wikipedia is not a platform for journalism. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Is there precedence for calling him Jim?
There is a recent controversy over whether Mattis approves of being called "Jim." My argument is that this was a one time instance, occurring only since his nomination for SecDef and will show to be incorrect over time. People's names don't change just because the press published it that way for one or two days. Not every person named "James" likes to be refered to by the nick-name "Jim" and, until Mattis' official biography changes to such, it should not be included here.--KMJKWhite (talk) 13:31, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * He's been called Jim since at least 2010 Therequiembellishere (talk) 20:21, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Nothing official identifies him as "Jim." Just because an occasional journalist assumes familiarity, doesn't mean he approves of its use. Yes, articles occasionally pop up using it. There were a lot of "Jim" Mattis articles last week and now everything is "James" again. That may well imply someone has identified it as an issue and corrected it. Until its officially sanctioned, or its use far more common than his given name, it should not be published here as such.--KMJKWhite (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Swearing in
Mattis has been confirmed, but hasn't yet been sworn in. Therefore he's (for the moment) Secretary of Defense-designate. GoodDay (talk) 22:19, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The information regarding the awards and decorations does not match those on the most recent photo's of General mantis in uniform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.51.121.171 (talk) 07:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Intro / Lede
Intro is hard to read, especially 2nd para. "Before" with "previously" in the same sentence is redundant. Grammar surgeon required, stat. Sadsaque (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

"Mad Dog"
Quotations are used in a full name to denote a colloquial or nickname. The inclusion of "Mad Dog" seems to me as below encyclopedic standards, and is especially not appropriate for a Cabinet official and employee of the United States federal government. This should be omitted. Frevangelion (talk) 04:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Given Mattis has just announced "Mad Dog" is not the name he prefers, I agree. KMJKWhite (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree. From time to time on articles I've seen hidden text instructing editors not to do this or that (usually in all caps). I don't know how to add that kind of text, but since a number of editors have been adding in "Mad Dog," do you think it's worth doing something like that? Marquardtika (talk) 16:55, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Knowing how to do html comments is good to know on several articles like this. Check it out for yourself. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 17:04, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and will do! Marquardtika (talk) 17:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

So can we mention that his radio call sign is CHAOS (Colonel Has An Outstanding Solution), and that he once said that the media made up the "mad dog" moniker? I used to think it was something he was known as, but recent news article (and or Mattis statements) make me think it was just a recent thing - maybe just a media/headline thing. --Uncle Ed (talk) 20:57, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * "I assure you that nickname was given to me by the press, and some of you may have experienced similar occasions with the press, where perhaps they didn't get it quite right," he said.
 * He was known as "Mad Dog" when he was still in the Marine Corps and I assumed it came from military peers. If it was invented by the media it was done years ago. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 21:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, plus I found a CNN quote:
 * Mattis earned the nickname "Mad Dog" after leading combat troops into the Persian Gulf War in 1991, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq in the early 2000s. He was called "Mad Dog" after the 2004 battle of Fallujah in Iraq, where he led British and American troops against Iraqi insurgents.
 * So maybe we could say, "Despite protestations that the media made up the nickname "Mad Dog" ... [something]"
 * But was it reporters or Marines who called him that? --Uncle Ed (talk) 21:09, 5 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Nicknames should only be included in the given name when that is what they are normally called, like James Ewell Brown "Jeb" Stuart, who was called Jeb Stuart. TFD (talk) 22:48, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mad Dog Matis (disc jockey) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:31, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Does this article need all these images?
I believe there are a few too many low-value images on this page. Per the Manual of Style, "Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative." Some images on this page add little value, perhaps even to being a distraction, given the article's current content. I'm not one to just jump in and start deleting images without addressing my concern. I would not object to keeping them, if someone who does recognize their value would add relative discussion to the article. Unless that happens, I propose the following images be removed from the article (caption shown): I'm open minded to different viewpoints. If anyone objects to deleting any of these, please discuss below. Thank you, KMJKWhite (talk) 14:18, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "A city street in Fallujah heavily damaged by the fighting, November 2004" - The image depicts Iraqi special forces, albeit attached to a Marine unit, patrolling Fallujah streets during the Second Battle of Fallujah. While a good image for that battle, it has very little to do with Mattis (whose role in that battle is not discussed here), and only remotely involves him leading Marines during the Iraq War.
 * "Joe Biden, Robert Gates, Mike Mullen and Mattis in Baghdad, Iraq" - It's a great photo of dignitaries observing a change of command in Iraq. However, it is applicable to this article only because it has Mattis in it. Neither that change of command, nor him meeting with those officials, are discussed in the article.
 * "Mattis and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, January 2012" - No where in the article does it discuss the relationship between Mattis and Secretary Clinton. The article does include, "the Obama administration did not place much trust in Mattis." However, the posed picture depicts a cordial meeting, with no hint of mistrust.
 * "Mattis in 2016" - Before he became Secretary of Defense, this image had value here. However, other than the tie, suit color and background, it is nearly identical to the main (i.e., infobox) image.
 * I think they give the article a better look and feel. They also convey useful context. I don't see any reason to remove them.Classafelonymonkey (talk) 15:25, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I would like to see some younger images of him as well, or swapped out with the ones that are here, if possible. I don't know if that is possible, as I have not been able to find any that are compliant with Wikipedia licensing requirements. I tried. Sec Defense Mattis was quite a cutie when he was about 20 years younger, and I think it is important for other females (such as myself) to get to see that.--FeralOink (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on James Mattis. 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/20100819190543/http://www.marines.mil/unit/hqmc/Pages/GatesMattisbringsexperience%2CcontinuitytoCentralCommand.aspx to http://www.marines.mil/unit/hqmc/Pages/GatesMattisbringsexperience%2CcontinuitytoCentralCommand.aspx
 * Added tag to http://insider.foxnews.com/2010/07/09/gen-mattis-the-warrior-monk

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Long overdue to move this page to Jim Mattis
He's referred to as such on his official Department of Defense profile and all major news stories including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal , the Washington Post , the Telegraph , Boston Globe , the Huffington Post , and POLITICO. I'm going to go ahead and move it again. If anyone has any objections, please voice them below.--Certified Gangsta (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose move I don't think "Jim Mattis" is the COMMONNAME. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:43, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * So you think Jimmy Carter's page should be James Carter? How about Bill Clinton? William Clinton? That makes zero sense. It's clearly the common name per all the news stories and even his own official profile on the Department of Defense website, for crying out loud. How much proof do you need?--Certified Gangsta (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose Agree with Chris. Per WP:BRD, you need to wait and have a discussion Gangsta. If you want to move it again, you need to do a requested move and get a consensus from others. Otherwise, you'll just be edit warring with others... Corky Buzz by the Hornet's Nest   15:47, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Lol look in the mirror, bro. I'm not the one edit warring and gang patrolling mainspace articles. Nobody owns these pages. Please read WP:OWN for your own benefits.--Certified Gangsta (talk) 15:50, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Despite being a ten-year editor you seem to have a longer block long than list of achievements. Not only should you be kinder to fellow Wikipedians, you should definitely give up being BOLD, forever. I recommend you become willing to have conversations and persuade, because I think we'd be fine if you left Wikipedia altogether. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * LOL and who is "we"? If you have a problem with my conduct, you're free to take me straight to ArbCom. I have no problem whatsoever with scrutiny. In fact, if you bother to look closely, most of my blocks were of the 1-second variety and they were APOLOGIES. Here's some friendly advice: Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. Because you have no idea what you're talking about. Feel free to check out User:Certified_Gangsta for a list of my proudest achievement on Wikipedia.--Certified Gangsta (talk) 16:17, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I also have strong reasons to believe you're either a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of Corkythehornetfan (not a surprise given his track record) and will request both a checkuser investigation and a gathering of behavioral evidence shortly. You two also might be in violation WP:CANVASS--Certified Gangsta (talk) 16:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Of course neither of you can come up with a coherent reason as to why it shouldn't be moved, so you resort to low-quality tactics like launching a concerted character assassination campaign against me. Classic!--Certified Gangsta (talk) 16:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * "...and will request both a checkuser investigation and a gathering of behavioral evidence shortly." Please do. You have no idea how much fun that would be. Yes, the whole world is arrayed in a conspiracy against you, because the fact that everyone seems to take issue with you cannot possibly be your fault. There's absolutely no good reason why a move that you made without consensus is suddenly opposed by other editors. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * * Oppose as per WP:COMMONNAME. - Neptuunium (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on James Mattis. 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/20120322203931/http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/06/ap_CMC_062110/ to http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/06/ap_CMC_062110/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100712031949/http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/07/military_mattis_centcom_070810w/ to http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/07/military_mattis_centcom_070810w/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120117234339/http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/07/marine_mattis_centcom_072110w/ to http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/07/marine_mattis_centcom_072110w/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430125117/https://slsp.manpower.usmc.mil/gosa/biographies/rptBiography.asp?PERSON_ID=121&PERSON_TYPE=General to https://slsp.manpower.usmc.mil/gosa/biographies/rptBiography.asp?PERSON_ID=121&PERSON_TYPE=General

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:06, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 23 November 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Mahveotm (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

James Mattis → Jim Mattis – The discussion above that petered out a couple of weeks ago showed eight sources referring to the subject as "Jim Mattis" but none showing "James Mattis": WP:COMMONNAME seems to be the appropriate policy here: Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources). The criteria that Article titles requires us to consider are: recognizability, naturalness, precision, conciseness, and consistency. The last three apply equally to "Jim Mattis" and "James Mattis". A Google search for "Jim Mattis" yields 1,180,000 Ghits and "James Mattis" produces 637,000, so there is not a huge preponderance in favour of "Jim" and both are clearly recognisable. That leaves us to make the decision based on naturalness, which would be the one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles, according to WP:AT.
 * 1) Department of Defense profile
 * 2) New York Times
 * 3) Wall Street Journal
 * 4) Washington Post
 * 5) The Telegraph
 * 6) Boston Globe
 * 7) Huffington Post
 * 8) POLITICO

I see both names in the sources used in our article, and I suspect that either one would be an acceptable title for the page, but I think it's sensible to acknowledge that fact, and try to reach a consensus on which name is the best fit to our policies. At the moment, I'm favouring the move to Jim Mattis, which seems to have more recent sources and Ghits. -- RexxS (talk) 16:48, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. The Defense Department's website hedges its bets by using both forms: James N. Mattis here and Jim Mattis here. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 00:55, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Thanks User:RexxS--Certified Gangsta (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Neptuunium (talk) 16:31, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support Per WP:COMMONNAME. Jim is favoured in reliable sources. AusLondonder (talk) 19:46, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Corky Buzz by the Hornet's Nest   03:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support - As much as I prefer full name article titles, this seems appropriate based off WP:COMMONNAME as said. Jak525 (talk) 01:31, Thursday, November 30, 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mentioning "Jim" in lead
thanks for your correction of my edit. Would it be better, in accordance with WP:NICKNAME, to say "James Norman Mattis, also known as Jim Mattis, [...]"? --Jak525 (talk) 01:25, Saturday, December 2, 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have a look at other articles where the subject is also known by a diminutive form of their given name, like Bill Clinton or Jim Morrison, you'll see that we normally state the birth name in the opening sentence, but not the "Bill" or "Jim", etc. form. That's probably because to any English speaker, the correspondence of "Jim" to "James" and so on, is so familiar that it's not worth mentioning.
 * It's different for less obvious alternate names, so Buffalo Bill begins William Frederick "Buffalo Bill" Cody .... Our article on John Wayne does indeed start with Marion Mitchell Morrison (born Marion Robert Morrison; May 26, 1907 – June 11, 1979), known professionally as John Wayne and nicknamed Duke ....
 * However, in cases like Jim/James Mattis, I don't think the alternative name form is worth worrying about. --RexxS (talk) 11:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, makes sense - thanks! --Jak525 (talk) 11:17, Saturday, December 2, 2017 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, makes sense - thanks! --Jak525 (talk) 11:17, Saturday, December 2, 2017 (UTC)

How much to put in the lede about his resignation?
IMO the lede should have one sentence, or at most two, about his resignation, with the details being under "Tenure". Earlier today I reduced it from two sentences to one, leaving this: On December 19 Trump announced via Twitter that he would order the immediate withdrawal of American troops from Syria; after trying unsuccessfully to get Trump to reconsider, Mattis submitted his resignation. But then User:ZiplineWhy added more info so it is now a full paragraph: In an "unprecendented" resignation on December 21, after substantial disagreement with the foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration, Mattis openly criticized the foreign policy views of Donald Trump. In his letter of resignation, Mattis warned that the worldview of Donald Trump is leading to an immense decline in the United States standing, undercutting the "the global order the United States helped build over the past seven decades." In response, Trump personally insulted Mattis on Twitter and ordered him fired by January 1st, 2 months before his planned resignation.

To me this is overkill, violating the spirit of what a WP:Lead section is supposed to be like, namely, a brief summary of the main points in the article. All of this information is certainly worth including, but in the body of the text, not the lead. What do others think? BTW let's agree on an approach and wording here, leaving it as it is until we reach consensus. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I support a middle ground by reverting to this earlier language:


 * soibangla (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, Soibangla. That was the version you put in, that I replaced with the one-sentence version. I thought the details about the timing were excessive for the lead. But that would certainly be an improvement over the way-TMI version now in the article. -- MelanieN (talk) 23:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with reverting to that. While President Trump has certainly insulted some people that have quit or he has fired before, I don't think the tweets about Mattis could be considered personal insults. Jak525 (talk) 08:42, Sunday, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

Mattis never saw any action himself
It should be mentioned in the article that Mattis himself never fired a shot. He was just a commander who ordered others into combat. 47.201.182.47 (talk) 13:37, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Nothing here alludes that he did, nor do we note this on any other general officer's article. It's more or less a given. Also, to be fair, I'm not sure if there's any definitive proof of Mattis never firing a weapon in a non-training environment. Jak525 (talk) 08:39, Monday, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

How is this a "blatant violation of WP:LEAD?"
?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Mattis&diff=914254299&oldid=914244448 soibangla (talk) 17:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

James Mattis’s Net Worth
The article sourced for James Mattis’s net worth doesn’t mention him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:AC (talk) 21:05, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Possible Equivocation on Introduction
In the 2nd line of the 2nd paragraph (as of 10-22-19), "A career Marine, he gained a reputation among his peers for 'anti-intellectualism', and eventually advanced to the rank of general.", it is implying Mattis's support for "anti-intellectualism". However, this appears to contradict more detailed descriptions of his military career further into the article. Second line of the 2nd paragraph under "Military Career", "He is noted for his interest in the study of military history and world history, with a personal library that once included over 7,000 volumes, and a penchant for publishing required reading lists for Marines under his command." is a cited statement implying the opposite of the uncited description in the introduction. Would it be possible to revise? Thanks.

--Redfactor4 (talk) 13:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

How Should Mattis's Rebuke to Trump Be added
I went and added the appropriate line breaks to match Mattis's statement and removed the reference to media. In my edits notes I also suggested that the full statement did not belong in the biography but deserved a mention. Yet the entire edit I made was removed. How best should we add Mattis's rebuke of Trump policies.

I tried to address the last reversions edits and summarize rthe posts...Having a bit of WikimMdia markup issues on the citations. Feedback and edits welcome. Jgmac1106 (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)


 * A potential issue I see is that in the section devoted to his reaction to the George Floyd protests, a Trump rebuttal to this is posted where Trump gloats of firing General Mattis, however General Mattis resigned on account of Trump abandoning America's Kurdish allies in Northern Syria, so this is not true. 186.87.8.121 (talk) 10:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Make sense to define it this way, maybe it should not be in a separate section and not listed in personal lie. I am thinking discussion of him resigning over Syria, Trump rebuttal, Mattis comments about staying silent for other commanders, breaking the silence 2020-06-02, and Trump's tweeted response.Jgmac1106 (talk) 13:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I wish editors did not use reversions as their only tool. The goal is to work together to improve articles not just erase efforts of others.Jgmac1106 (talk) 13:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * NVM I see the section added, I like the way it was handled.Jgmac1106 (talk) 13:20, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2020
Under the heading Military career -> US Central Command, please remove the line:

"Mattis announced his retirement from the Marine Corps in April 2012, effective in a matter of months.[64] Eight months later, the Defense Department nominated General Lloyd Austin to succeed Mattis, who retired in March 2013"

and replace with:

"In December 2013, the Defense Department nominated General Lloyd Austin to succeed Mattis, who retired in March 2013"

The line about Mattis announcing his retirement in April 2012 is incorrect. The citation is from a satire blog. Foodhi (talk) 04:21, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 04:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

The edit as written implies that Mattis made the decision to retire and then a replacement was announced. There is speculation that the announcement of a replacement in December 2012 came as a surprise to Mattis and that his March 2013 retirement was forced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodhi (talk • contribs) 04:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, speculations are not reliable sources... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that speculation isn't reliable, I'm just saying that the announcement of the replacement came before any announcement of retirement.Foodhi (talk) 20:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , I don't think that's correct. Do you have a source showing that? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Catholic?
Aside from the 1 WaPo article I can find no attribution for this claim and no statements made by the man himself. Can this be established? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:153:600:FD40:2C44:3661:D7A6:742C (talk) 19:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

https://news.yahoo.com/mattis-told-then-dni-coats-201720573.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20vc2VhcmNoP3E9bWF0dGlzJTIwbmF0aW9uYWwlMjBjYXRoZWRyYWwmcXM9biZmb3JtPVFCUkUmc3A9LTEmcHE9JnNjPTAtMCZzaz0mY3ZpZD1GREY0QkQwNEEzRTY0QzUzOUIyMzg2RTJGNTc4Mzc1Ng&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIbSXNTwPWH_IUgIJ-Hs4lI3nnf36C76Mufk2mhCubREkokRMz6yDdWlGd9Fxf1CiP2bfntTzNiESZYz3L_P0IvfwB8LQFw7kc4mInr0EcU18zZNaHwo7MaKhJd4LALQNie8PzRkpJcdsitfy2R7_tZXj_ccBwNv--pFDhIekgeX this article mentions him praying at the National Cathedral, which is Episcopalian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 6.50.20.212 (talk) 23:34, 9 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Bold 178.120.23.88 (talk) 09:24, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Sniper from TF2
Someone needs to write that in Team Fortress 2, Sniper, in his introduction video Meet the Sniper, quotes Mattis when he says "Be polite, be efficient, and have a plan to kill everyone you meet." This is almost perfect, as Mattis originally said, "but have a plan to kill everyone you meet." Stick-Destiny (talk) 16:28, 3 February 2021 (UTC)