Talk:John Abt

Conspiracy Theories
The original research argument relevant to this page is discussed on the Talk:Harry_Magdoff/Archive1 page.

DJ Silverfish 03:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I am confused -- what exactly are you disputing here?  That there was a meeting, early in 1944, in John Abt's apartment, between Abt, Elizabeth Bentley, Victor Perlo, Charles Kramer, Harry Magdoff, and Edward Fitzgerald? Or the specifics of what was discussed at that meeting?  Or something else?  And, what exactly is the "conspiracy theory" that you are alleging?  Also, what is the "original research argument" here?  Something in the article, but not in the references quoted?  What exactly?   Please clarify your objections, referring to this specific article, and to the subject at hand.  Thanks.  Turgidson 04:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

As someone who just stumbled across this page, it reads like a lot of hearsay and innuendo. If BLP applied, a lot of this stuff wouldn't make it, not by a country mile. 98.216.11.183 (talk) 03:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Lack of Factual Basis
This article recites bare allegations against John Abt and the "Ware Group" as being historical facts. From what I've seen, no one has ever produced credible evidence of these allegations against Mr. Abt, and from evaluating this article, I see no revelation of hitherto undiscovered proof that justifies posting such accusations to an internet encyclopedia as if they were true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben.Remahl (talk • contribs) 01:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Abt. 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/20130918034225/http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/venona/1944/13may_new_recruits.pdf to http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/venona/1944/13may_new_recruits.pdf

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) 00:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Adequate Summary
Why do Wikipedians bother to mark a page with this banner?

''This article's lead section does not adequately summarize key points of its contents. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page.''

If you have bothered to make the comment, you have already bothered to make the assessment, which means you know what it lacks, so why not bother just a tad further and fix it?

Why do so many Wikipedians seem to revel in criticizing without doing better themselves?

I am removing the banner -- and inviting this critic and all others to stop wasting time on banners and start making constructive changes Aboudaqn (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)