User talk:BrandonTR

Further reading — unreliable references
I'm removing the book titled, "False Witness: The Real Story of Jim Garrison's Investigation and Oliver Stone's Film JFK," because the book's title reveals that it is irrelevant to the Oswald biography.BrandonTR (talk) 02:52, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

for BrandonTR
http://www.giljesus.com/ Recently, a rash of "Oswald did it alone" documentaries have been produced by the likes of the History Channel, the Discovery Channel, HBO and other cable TV conglomerates whose parent companies have had historical ties to the CIA. The common thread running through these "lone gunman Oswald" documentaries seems to be the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas, Texas, whose curator, Gary Mack, recently admitted on a TV show that he believed Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. In their attempts to rewrite history, these media giants have completely ignored the evidence that you will see on this website.

I believe that this evidence shows that Oswald did NOT kill President Kennedy, that he did NOT kill Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit, and that he did NOT fire the shot at General Edwin A. Walker in April of 1963. I believe that there are serious questions regarding the evidence in the case and its handling, first by the Dallas Police and later by the FBI.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.62.161 (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

"Agents" fingerprinted Oswald corpse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2W_-ID8RMI

Paul Groody, the mortician who recieved Oswald's body after his autopsy, says that in the early morning of Monday, November 25th, "agents" visited his funeral home and asked to be alone with Oswald's body. After they left, he had to remove fingerprint ink from Oswald's fingers and hands. Since Oswald's fingerprints were available from the Marine Corps, the New Orleans Police and the Dallas Police, what possible reason could there be for representatives of a government agency to fingerprint Oswald's corpse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.16.124 (talk) 15:49, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jack Ruby, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soldier of fortune (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi from another user
Hello. I read with interest your contributions to the LHO article and talk. You might be interested to read my input on the subject. If you want to communicate with me via email about the subject, feel free (Emailing users). In any case don't let it get you down. Kind regards, Paavo273 (talk) 21:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Dean Andrews Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Secret Service


 * List of people involved in the trial of Clay Shaw (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Secret Service

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=594557200 your edit] to David Sánchez Morales may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * lpg=PP1&pg=PA438#v=onepage&q&f=false Who Killed Bobby?: The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy], O'Sullivan, Shane. (New York: Sterling Publishing, 2008) ISBN 1-4027-5444-2 O'Sullivan

Edit-warring on LHO
I'm counting four reverts on Lee Harvey Oswald in twenty four hours and three minutes. You appear to be edit-warring. Please desist and engage in discussion. --Pete (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mosaic Inc.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Mosaic Inc.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:OswaldinMinsk.jpg
Does the original report, indicate the source of the image in more detail? Given the description does it for example attribute a US agency for example? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:53, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theories - Recent Vandalism Edits
Thanks for the tidy up of the page you did recently but having checked the edits you made these appear to be corrections of grammar or ref links. When stating reasons please be clear as to what these are.

ToonIsALoon (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Oswald’s whereabouts?
The article currently says that Marrion Baker saw Oswald on the second floor, but JFK historian Stan Dane has suggested in his book and research, “Prayer Man”, that Baker originally said he saw a man walking away from a stairway on the 3rd or 4th floor, a man who doesn’t match Oswald’s description, and that original interrogation reports say Oswald was on the first floor, at the entrance, (not in the first floor room or second floor lunchroom) and may have captured on film outside, and is the figure called “Prayer Man” (a very blurry image of a man in the TSBD doorway in the Couch film who, the author and others claim, was Oswald). Plus, it's a new original theory, and it does put Baker's claims into question and seems to suggest that Oswald's claims of where he was at the time Kennedy was shot have been misinterpreted. I am aware it is a "fringe" theory as it dismisses, out of hand, positive, corroborating evidence in order to accept flimsy evidence placing Oswald elsewhere. If it cannot go here, then it more properly resides on the conspiracy theory page, If realible sources for this research can be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.220.81 (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Leavelle interrogating Oswald on 22?
I just noticed that the LHO article (great job, btw, it certainly deserves its star) contradicts the one covering Jim Leavelle. This article says Oswald was questioned by Detective Jim Leavelle about the shooting of Officer Tippit on the 22nd after his arrest with the words, "Oswald was taken to the Police Department building, where homicide detective Jim Leavelle questioned him about the shooting of Officer Tippit". But Leavelle’s biographical article on Wikipedia states the exact opposite - that he only interrogated Oswald on the 24th - the morning Oswald was shot, and that he had never talked to him before. Not accusing Leavelle of being unrealible or a liar but his interviews he has done in recent years are in contray to his WC testimony. Memory always distort from time to time. When Leavelle testified before the Warren Commission, he claimed that the first time he had ever sat in on an interrogation with Oswald was on Sunday morning, November 24, 1963. When Counsel Joseph Ball asked Leavelle if he had ever spoken to Oswald before this interrogation, he stated; "No, I had never talked to him before". Leavelle then stated during his testimony that "the only time I had connections with Oswald was this Sunday morning [November 24, 1963]. I never had [the] occasion to talk with him at any time..." In various interview since the 1970s and up to the mid 2010s, Leavelle said that he was the first to interrogate Oswald after his arrest (contrary to his Warren Commission testimony).

In the course of my research into the JFK case, I encountered a number of examples where I had testimony or accounts by people from 1963/64 as well as from years or decades later. It became apparent that the testimony and writings from 63/64 were superior. These were obtained when the events was still fresh in their memories, and as a result were clearer, usually more detailed, and consistent with what other people wrote or recalled at the time. Whenever I had conflicting accounts by a person to deal with, I would use the earlier of the two. As Jim Leavelle’s interview testimony to the Warren Commission were so specific that the first time he had ever sat in on an interrogation with Oswald was on Sunday morning, November 24, 1963, and that he had never talked to him before. I would place no value on second-hand information based upon various interviews with Leavelle which had occurred over two/three/four decades after the event.

Bart Kemp has done an article looking at the differing accounts, called "Anatomy of Lee Harvey Oswald's interrogations" that can be found on the internet. Kemp is pro-conspiracy, so be warned if you want to read it. :)

Should the words "homicide detective Jim Leavelle questioned him about the shooting of Officer Tippit" be removed and/or Leavelle's warren commission testimony used instead? I read his WC testimony again; Leavelle never "interrogated" Oswald about the JFK assassination or Tippit murder on Sunday morning, Nov. 24th, or any other day. He merely "spoke" to Oswald about the upcoming transfer while Oswald was changing clothes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.220.81 (talk) 21:20, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SunShareCommunitySolar.png
Thanks for uploading File:SunShareCommunitySolar.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:43, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Douglass ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/CIA_Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theory check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/CIA_Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theory?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked
Blocked indefinitely per the community consensus here, re the BrandonTRA account. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of SunShare for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SunShare is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/SunShare until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  HighKing++ 20:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)