Talk:Leo Ryan/Archive 2

Update on Larry Layton
Dear Friends,

I researched a documentary film on Jonestown a few years ago, and during that job I spoke to some relatives of Larry Layton, to one victim of his violence, and also to one of the lawyers who represented him.

Larry was a prisoner of 18 years whose worst offence in prison was to return a library book late. A key reason why he was realeased is that a parole hearing took place very shortly after 9/11. Jackie Speier, who was badly wounded at the airstrip, is now a major figure in the government of California. She had always argued against Layton's release, but this time, she had other pressing duties because of 9/11.

At the hearing, a key witness was Vernon Gosney, who was shot by Layton at the Port Kaituma scene. Gosney argued that he could not bear that one man should suffer for all the crimes of Jim Jones. Vernon Gosney is now a police officer, living with AIDS, in the state of Hawaii.

Layton has worked at lousy retail jobs since his release, and he absolutely never talks about Jonestown, in spite of the enormous Media attention of recent years. I have spoken to a few of his relatives, and they all say that Larry will just shake his head and decline to comment, even to them. The only exceptions I know of are to his sister (Debbie Layton) and to his lawyers, and then only in refernce to his legal affairs.

Sincerely yours, Robert P. Helms —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BobHelms (talk • contribs) 00:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Notes regarding Leo Ryan
Hello Friends,

I researched a film about Jonestown a few years ago, and in the process I spoke with two of Leo Ryan's daughters, as well as other paople close to the congressman. I am writing to note that Leo was a positively charismatic person, and that his daughters told me that his little speech on the evening before his death was perhaps not as relaxed as people who did not know the man would assume. They felt that he showed signs of pressure that one would not notice unless they knew him personally.

I think that it is also important to know that Ryan was married more than twice, and that at least one of his several children was or is a member of a cult. This has played into the after-story of Jonestown a great deal.

Sincerely, Robert P. Helms
 * Robert, thank you for your information. If you want this to get into the article, please let us know on the talk page here locations of some sourced secondary reputable citations, and I and/or others will add the material.  But you have already given some tidbits and I will hunt for more sources.  Thank you for the info.  Yours, Smee 03:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

First House member, not congressman, killed?
Great article, but I noticed that it claimed Leo Ryan was the first member of Congress killed in the line of duty. Technically, a senator can sometimes be referred to as a member of Congress. In 1860, sitting U.S. senator Edward Baker was shot at the battle of Ball's Bluff. So I changed it to member of the House of Representatives. see http://blueandgraytrail.com/photo/9 71.198.36.27 06:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hrm, please provide information verifying this from a reputable secondary source, as per policy. Also, I changed the wording to "Congressman".  Senators are hardly if ever referred to as "Congressman".  Smee 05:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

Good article

 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px|Good articles]] Article upgraded to Good Article status, on 9 May 2007. Passed, Listed as a good article, on Good Articles.  Smee 06:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
 * At present, the article has citations to (57) reputable sources, as well as (4) free-use images. Smee 06:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Archived FA discussion
I archived an old FA nom discussion (failed), to Featured article candidates/Leo Ryan/Archive1. This was waaaay before I came upon this article and expanded it to its current (57) citations. Smee 21:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Info to be added on California legislation
Smee 07:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
 * 1) -- Talks about Ryan Act of 1970 ...
 * 2)  -- Also discusses Ryan Act.
 * 3) Oh, Why the Ryan Act?
 * 4) California's Community Colleges and the Ryan Act
 * 5) Lots more reputable citations available. Search for "Ryan Act", 1970, California, etc. ...

Critic of Scientology - really?
If it is true that Ryan was an outspoken critic of Scientology, the fact seems to have gone unnoticed by the Scientologists. Freedom magazine, a Scientology publication, issued a glowing report on the congressman, emphasizing his efforts to shine a light on CIA involvement in psychiatric mind control operations like MK Ultra, and calling for further investigation into unresolved factors regarding his death.

The Freedom article also happens to contain the transcript of an interview with the medical examiner at the scene of the Jonetown incident. This transcript provokes some interesting questions which seem to be quite worthy of mention in the Wikipedia article but are at this point omitted.

Due to the obvious value of interviews such as that mentioned as well as of one or more other key personnel, pages at the UCSD website of an investigative project into the Jonestown incidents cite the Freedom magazine article in several places.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is it not strange that this Wikipedia article is devoid of such treatment?

-Tmst —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tmst8 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Interesting points, albeit that "Freedom" magazine is a relatively biased source on the matter... I will be adding more on this topic further in the coming days.  Smee 05:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

Critic of Scientology - really.
Congress of the United states House of Representatives December 10, 1976
 * Text of letter to Ida Camburn from Congressman Leo J. Ryan, on official United States House of Representatives letterhead.
 * The image of this letter has since been released unde the GNU Free Documentation License by its owner.

Dear Ida Camburn,

Thank you for your very detailed letter regarding Scientology. We haven't yet found a way to attack these jackals who feed on children and young adults who are too emotionally weak to stand by themselves when they reach the age of consent.

It's too bad there isn't a 20th Century Charles Dickens to write about the terrible destruction of these 20th Century fagins who make themselves rich while they destroy the psyche of so many.

At the present time, I can only encourage you to do more of what you have been doing.

Sincerely yours Leo J Ryan Member of Congress
 * I hope this helps clarify the Congressman's position on Scientology. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 21:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC).

State Department Characterization
With regard to the sentence "According to the San Francisco Chronicle, while investigating the events, the United States Department of State 'repeatedly stonewalled Ryan's attempts to find out what was going on in Jonestown', and told him that 'everything was fine.'" I realize that author Mark Simon characterized it this way in short conclusory fashion in 1998, but it's not really accurate. What really happened is that State briefed Ryan on pretty much everything they knew, which was limited, and explained that international and U.S. law prevented the U.S. government from doing much more in Guyana than surface inquiries regarding potential social security check coercion, customs and immigration issues. An argument could be made that the State Department didn't vigorously interview enough people before (they did interview 75 Jonestown members in 1978), but they didn't really stonewall Ryan. Also, McCoy, Dwyer and Burke didn't tell Ryan "everything was fine" (regardless of Simon's characterization), but instead said that they didn't have any indication from visits and interviews that people were being held against their will. I would delete that sourced sentence and include another explaining what actually happened. Mosedschurte (talk) 06:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If you could find a different secondary WP:V/WP:RS source, and present that, then we could discuss it, but I would be opposed to deleting the current sourced info. Cirt (talk) 06:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Frankly, every source (Reiterman, the House Report, the documents themselves, etc.) doesn't characterize it the way Simon did. This would be a far more accurate (and from much more credible sources) paragraph: Mosedschurte (talk)


 * In 1978, officials from the United States Embassy in Guyana interviewed Temple Social Security recipients on multiple occasions to try to determine whether they were being held against their will. None of the 75 people the Embassy interviewed stated that they were being held against their will, were forced to sign over welfare checks or wanted to leave Jonestown. Citing the Privacy Act and its legal inability to enforce laws in Guyana, the State Department had taken what it stated to be a "middle ground" between the Temple and those pushing for a more aggressive investigation than that which it was already doing.  Ryan argued that the State Department was being overly cautious in ints interpretation of the Privacy Act and guarded its files on individual Temple members too closely.  The State Department briefed Ryan's aides before the trip to Guyana, and briefed both Ryan and his aides in Georgetown, but never briefed Ryan on the circumstances surrounding a defecting Temple member or Jones' declining health on the State Department's last visit. Mosedschurte (talk) 08:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I would certainly give more weight to Reiterman than Simon, in this case. Cirt (talk) 08:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Only congressman killed in the line of duty
See above sources. Cirt (talk) 09:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) (archived page, alternate link, PDF Congressional Record)

Killed in performance of duty
I'd advise people making the claim that Ryan is the only man with this unwanted distinction to look at the list here http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs/data/2002/meta-crs-2269.tkl, for example. George Leland and George Heinke were clearly killed while carrying out Congressional duties, and it's likely that some of the other persons killed in plane crashes died while commuting between Washington and their home districts as part of their job. James McPherson Pinckney was killed in a manner broadly similar to Ryan: the list gives little detail, but he was murdered by anti-Prohibitionists while he attended a meeting whose purpose was to draft a petition to ensure that a recently passed Prohibition law was enforced by police. The attempt to slice out James M. Hinds appears to me to rest on an arbitrary distinction; he was killed for attempting to protect the voting rights of black people in the South, but little matter. If some kind of statement about Ryan's uniqueness is made it needs to be a lot more narrowed. 71.136.180.66 (talk) 06:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * We should avoid interpreting and parsing from primary sources and instead rely on secondary sources. I have just provided an additional secondary source that says the exact same thing, the San Francisco Chronicle. Can you provide a secondary source to dispute this? Cirt (talk) 06:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I just did. All the sources you list, include this additional one from the SF Chronicle, clearly derive from statements or interviews with Lantos.  There's no weight to be given to anybody if he speaks in ignorance.  George Heinke was killed in an accident while attempting to show up at the opening of the 3rd session of the 76th Congress.  George Leland was killed in Ethiopia while on a fact-finding tour on African famine.  I just noted the circumstances of J. M. Pinckney's assassination; more material on it can be located at http://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/PP/fpi24.html or http://ftp.rootsweb.ancestry.com/pub/usgenweb/tx/milam/newspapers/rock1905.txt .  These alone show Lantos's assertions to be unfounded, and given the number of crashes that have taken the lives of Congressmen it's likely that others were killed carrying out their duties via commuting as well. If the goal is to preserve a statement about the rarity of what happened to Ryan, it really needs to be carved down to something more specific than "only Congressman killed in the line of duty." I'd change "killed" to "murdered"/"assassinated", and perhaps add "overseas" to keep him distinct from Pinckney and Hinds. 71.136.180.66 (talk) 07:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I highly doubt that all those (4) above cited sources came from Lantos. You are again interpreting primary sources in an attempt to back up your assertion. I ask again, can you cite any secondary sources to back up your argument? Cirt (talk) 07:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * While I was posting that you added two news reports that repeat the claim w/o citing Lantos; instead they cite Leo Ryan's daughter, which I don't think rubs out the facts. Statements made in ignorance aren't of any weight.  Let me ask you this: how is the statement correct in the light of Pinckney, Leland, Heinke and Hinds? The circumstances of their deaths are a matter of public record, which you have not disputed.  71.136.180.66 (talk) 07:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The source for that article is not Ryan's daughter, that is merely the title of the article. I am not going to begin to get into a debate with you over interpretation from primary sources over who did or did not die in the line of duty. I am simply going by what is stated in (now 5) secondary sources listed, and quoted, above. Cirt (talk) 07:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The only book you cite is an item called The Dark Charade, a nutso conspiracy book whose back-jacket raves about the "Khazar-Zionists and their anti-Christ behavior". There are hundreds of references to Leo Ryan on Google Books, but this is the only one you (or I) could dig up that would dare make this patently incorrect claim.  This, I assume, is because the standard of references are higher for book-print.  On Google's news archive there are over 600 articles mentioning Ryan's death, but less than a half-dozen purport him to be the first and only Congressman killed in the line of duty, mostly minor papers, and the claim usually appears in passing during a piece on either Lantos or a member of Ryan's family.  One paper, the San Mateo Journal, merely contents itself with quoting Ryan's daughter: "I don't want them to learn about him being the first congressman to be assassinated in the line of duty. It's his broader career that matters." (http://www.rickross.com/reference/jonestown/jonestown21.html)  This is a fringe view which gives no evidence of having been researched, the concept of "duty" is never defined and it would have to be defined narrowly to exclude the known instances of others, and the statements here waffle between assassinated/slain and killed, which don't mean the same thing.  I don't care for a debate either about this silly stuff, which is why I preferred junking this marginal piece of journalism altogether, but if you want it to stay we'll have to deal with history and narrowly phrase the statement. 71.136.180.66 (talk) 08:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree. I have clearly put forth secondary sources, with quotes, in the above subsection. I am still waiting for you to bring forth any other secondary sources that dispute the (6) listed above. Cirt (talk) 08:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You've selected the less than 1% of journalism on Leo Ryan that dares to make a bullshit claim, mostly puff pieces on either Ryan's successor Tom Lantos or his family --- also a crank book that laughably claims that Ryan was awarded the Medal of Honor. I already have produced sources which show that other congressmen were killed in the line of duty.  Your intransigence on this issue is puzzling to me.  I've offered to work with you to salvage the statement by bringing in some specificity, and still do until you can show that the public facts about Pinckney et al are in error. 71.136.180.66 (talk) 09:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do not use impolite language. It detracts from attempts to have a constructive and civil dialogue. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 09:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Nothing more I'd like to have. Do you have a response?  Claiming I haven't presented sources which dispute your pieces won't do.  71.136.180.66 (talk) 09:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I have now added a total of (11) cites to various sources, including Congressman Tom Lantos, the San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, Associated Press, and United Press International, all of which corroborate each other and say essentially the same thing. Cirt (talk) 09:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, and they're all blatantly nonsense except the last one, which offers the best framework for revision. It has the narrowest phrasing, actually defines duty, and is not copied lazily from Lantos or Ryan fils, who don't know anything.  My recommendation is we remove all the other stuff because they're too broad and easily in conflict with known facts, and use Sherman's formulation: "Ryan was the first congressman in the history of the United States to be assassinated while conducting an official investigation in the line of duty". This removes the Lelands and Heinkes on one end, the Pinckneys and Hindses on the other.71.136.180.66 (talk) 09:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Disagree. We should leave the present wording. It is backed up to all of the cites listed above. And your assertion that they're all blatantly nonsense except the last one, which offers the best framework for revision. and copied lazily from Lantos or Ryan fils, who don't know anything is not backed up by anything but your own personal interpretation of those sources I cited. You have not cited any secondary sources that say anything differently - simply your own personal interpretation of primary sources. Cirt (talk) 09:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And to simply discount the value of the sources Congressman Tom Lantos, the San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, Associated Press as "blatantly nonsense" and "copied lazily from Lantos or Ryan fils", without giving any other secondary source that specifically says that another Congressman was killed "in the line of duty", is simply inappropriate. Cirt (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see strong basis for your disagreement. The other sources are in conflict with historical records and sow confusion by not defining what duty or manner of death was.  At face value they're simply wrong, unless a reader chooses to arbitrarily deduce a distinction that would exclude Hinds, although that doesn't resolve Pinckney; or a distinction that would cut away Heinke, although that doesn't take care of Leland.... ad nauseum.  Sherman actually states what it was that made Ryan's death historically unique.  Don't get stuck into defending a cramped corner of the wall when there's a cozy table to sit down at that resolves all objections. 71.136.180.66 (talk) 10:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You have also never provided anything to back up your claims that any particular source is "copied lazily" from any other source - this is again your own personal interpretation into sources and is inappropriate. Cirt (talk) 09:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, but never claimed different. I can provide quotes from both Lantos and Ryan claiming falsely that Leo was the only congressman to be killed in the line of duty, and most of the news articles that parrot the claim are puff pieces on one or the other clearly based on interviews with them.  Not one of these articles gives any sign of research into the question, and this came up because you claimed independent corroboration from what were actually two articles derived from interviews with Lantos.71.136.180.66 (talk) 10:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope. Sorry. The sources I have cited satisfy WP:RS, and your claims and insinuations about those sources regarding what you think they did for their research simply does not. Cirt (talk) 10:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry what? The statements are clearly false based on historical records, which is the end of it, and most of them are just puff pieces on Lantos and the Ryan family. There's nowhere to go but Mr. Sherman's specificity.  71.136.180.66 (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, this statement is simply your personal interpretation - which is why it is so important to rely on secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 10:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * My statement is based on historical records, all cited, and Spencer Sherman's specific phrasing which is consistent with them. I worry you're getting more swept up with "winning" an argument rather than keeping the article as factual as possible, and I still await your response to the main thread of conversation. This is a dispute that's easily resolvable.  71.136.180.66 (talk) 10:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Your statement is based on your own personal reading of historical records, and contradicts direct quotes from multiple WP:RS secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 10:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

In terms of a possible compromise that is perhaps more substantively accurate, I think all of the various sources backing up the claim likely meant that Ryan was the only Congressman "murdered" (not killed) in the line of duty. That is, while directly conducting Congressional duties, such as Ryan's Congressional investigation into U.S. citizens' well beings in Jonestown.

Most of the others were killed in accidents or war, Hinds was killed while campaigning and a couple of others were killed in 19th century gentlemens' duels.

Or perhaps even "killed in the line of duty" is accurate as it stands if none of the others were directly conducting official Congressional duties at the time of their deaths. I really don't know. I suppose it should be left that way given that multiple sources have stated this and there is no indication as of now that others were conducting official Congressional duties at the time of their deaths.Mosedschurte (talk) 16:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree with re: none of the others were directly conducting official Congressional duties at the time of their deaths. This is supported by the direct statements in the multiple cited/quoted secondary sources above. Also agree with  that it is best to leave the text of the article and phrasing as is. Cirt (talk) 20:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

For consideration


While the Huffington Post cite is, on a surface, a blog, Pat Lynch certainly seems to have recognition in the field of news reporting. (See bio from link) AndroidCat (talk) 05:48, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Other background
Ida J. Camburn exchanged letters with Congressman Leo Ryan about the notorious Scientology crime syndicate, detailing in debth Scientology's "disconnection" racketeering activities which Scientology engages in to keep family members from helping loved ones escape from Scientology -- and to stop handing over their money, of course.

In a number of letters sent to Ida (a.k.a. "Mom," as she is known among human rights and civil rights activists in Southern California) Congressman Ryan informed Ida that he would be working on stopping Scientology's predations and crimes and unfortunately the Rev. Jim Jones Christians murdered him before he could really get his teeth in to Hubbard and the other Scientology crime bosses.

It would be nice to contact Ida there in Hemet, California for a review of this Wikipedia article and to solicit commentary from her -- and to get photocopies of the letters from Ryan that she retains. Fredric Rice (talk) 04:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * See commons:Category:Leo Ryan. Cirt (talk) 03:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about the Scientology racketeering allegations (not that they're necessarily false, I just possess no knowledge on the subject), but perhaps topically relevant is that the Peoples Temple was in constant contact with Scientology management regarding combating Cult opposition organizations. After the tragedy, I believe the Church of Scientology conducted extensive investigations into the demise of the Peoples Temple at Georgetown.Mosedschurte (talk) 04:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I removed
I removed the "inhumane" from the "inhumane killing of seals" because it catagorizes the seal hunt as entirely inhumane which is false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.170.207 (talk) 18:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Good source of info on Ryan reforms
Cirt (talk) 16:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:BobBrownKaituma.jpg
The image File:BobBrownKaituma.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --05:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Only U.S. congressman killed in line of duty?
The last paragraph of the lead currently states that "Ryan is the only U.S. congressman ever to be killed in the line of duty." What about representative Larry McDonald, who was killed five years later in the KAL 007 shootdown? -- 58.147.52.66 (talk) 04:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sources state specifically that Ryan is the only U.S. congressman ever to be killed in the line of duty. Cirt (talk) 08:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Addition out of history chrono order
He was extradited to the United States after having been found not-guilty of attempted murder by a Guyanese court due to having been brainwashed, and the charge of conspiracy was made as he could not be tried in the US for attempted murder.


 * Not sure if this was added in the right chrono order in history. Please discuss? -- Cirt (talk) 02:56, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Reference to Gabrielle Giffords
While I was looking for a history of assassinations against congressmen and congresswomen, I came across this: "He was the first member of Congress to have been killed in the line of duty, and the last until the assassination of Gabrielle Giffords in 2011." I had to remove the reference to Giffords. There are still mixed reports about her state with some sources saying she has died and with some others saying she is in surgery. Please wait until there are verified reports that she has indeed died. Thanks. 70.81.171.180 (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You removed minutes after it was placed thank you for doing that. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem! I just do some minor edits sometimes, but I'll leave the rest of the situation to you guys. 70.81.171.180 (talk) 20:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Always appreciate it. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 20:16, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

"Ryan was the first and only U.S. Member of Congress to have been killed in the line of duty."
While he was certainly the first, arguably Congressman Larry McDonald and Senator Robert F. Kennedy were also "killed in the line of duty". They are listed on United States members of Congress wounded or killed in the line of duty. Should this sentence be amended? The Celestial City (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This is confirmed as per multiple WP:RS sources, cited directly after the factual info in the article. -- Cirt (talk) 13:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * What about James M Hinds, who was murdered? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_M._Hinds —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.234.19.18 (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * From the same person who has removed the reference to Giffords, I have no issue about editing the sentence removing the word "only". I was under impression he was the only one killed then and I was looking around to see if there were any other attacks/murders against Congress members on line of duty. Naturally, I did forget about Bob Kennedy, but I did apperciate a good link to a list of those attacked and killed. I was just curious then! 70.81.171.180 (talk) 08:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Leo_Ryan/Archive_2, where a list of supporting sources and quotes from those sources, is given. Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with User:The Celestial City's question regarding Ryan's status as the "only" member of the U.S. Congress killed in the line duty, especially when taking into account the example of Larry McDonald. --TommyBoy (talk) 05:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. This must be what folks are talking about when they say be wary of Wikipedia. Ryan is clearly neither the first, nor the only, MOC killed in the line of duty, yet some historic and erroneous reporting justifies continuing to describe him thus? ([[User talk: Bobbeers|talk}}) 21:56, 19 June 2011 (PST)
 * It'd be appreciated if you could suggest other secondary sources to back up your assertions. -- Cirt (talk) 04:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * United States Congress members killed or wounded in office I'm not sure how it can be stated that Ryan is the only member of congress killed in office when there is a list of 13 members of congress killed in office.  --KevinTR (talk) 07:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Succession of office
The right summary table lists his successor in Congress as William Royer. Yet body text lists his successor as Tom Lantos. I suspect the difference is due to changes in the district boundaries and thus both may be true; yet to a casual reader the article seems internally inconsistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.20.54 (talk) 07:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Ryan is the only U.S. Member of Congress killed in the line of duty.
This line is directly contradicted by this article - the sources (all media sources) all seem to be parroting off each other. Zambelo ; talk 09:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

This claim probably refers to the fact that Ryan died while actually performing an official duty; he wasn't killed while campaigning or walking down the street, and didn't die in a fight or battle, but died in the act of doing his job. Other Congressmen/women may have died in office, but he died in the actual line of duty.Sdacj (talk) 03:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:41, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

His family
Much information is here about Ryan's daughters, but no information or even mention is made of his two sonsSdacj (talk) 22:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Scientology criticism
I see that this page is categorized under "Critics of Scientology", but Scientology isn't even mentioned in the page. --Slashme (talk) 08:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)