Talk:Jacques Paul Klein

---

Very poorly-formatted article, missing information

This article is impossible to read - it's a wall of text with no sections to speak of.

Additionally, there is nothing in here about Mr. Klein's retirement from the UN or the sealed UN documents indicating that he may have been responsible for passing on UN secrets to the dictator of Liberia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shifuimam (talk • contribs) 15:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jacques Paul Klein. 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/20130606031159/http://projects.militarytimes.com/citations-medals-awards/ to http://projects.militarytimes.com/citations-medals-awards/

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) 20:20, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit request

Per a request received by OTRS from the WMF Trust & Safety team, the subject of the article wants a retraction to be noted. Here's the link to the retraction: [1]. I've noted the claims by the person to be accurate and thus, a retraction by a reliable source is noted as well. VRTS ticket # 2019042410009127 --qedk (t 桜 c) 12:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@QEDK: The retraction from The Post is described as correcting a false characterization of Ms. Fawaz "regularly travel(ing) on U.N. aircraft in violation of organizational rules" to the more accurate "travel(ing) on such flights 'on occasion.'" However, the Wikipedia article in its current configuration does not mention anything to do with Ms. Fawaz, either erroneous or not. At the outset it seems odd to mention a woman who was thought to travel frequently but later found to be travelling on occassion, especially since that woman and her travels are not mentioned in the article in the first place. Mentioning the retraction would entail mentioning the initial error, an error which — by the way — is not worlds apart from the corrected information which succeeds it. Is the subject asking that this information be intentionally added to the article? Such actions are easily done — I just want to make sure this is what the subject wants — and that they are aware that nothing is currently stated in the article about this topic, in case they thought otherwise. Please advise, and also, further explain the subject's wishes, if possible. Thanks!  Spintendo  14:06, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Unfortunately, the ticket mostly says that the subject does not like the Washington Post-sourced statement and provided that a (partial?) retraction was made, probably wanted it removed. In my editorial opinion to the WMF, I recommended the subject making an edit request themselves depending on the edits they wanted to see, but upon further emails, I filed the edit request on behalf of the subject, as a solution to another problem posed by the WMF. I think the best course of action is to just document the retraction in its entirety, as it is hard to place on what was retracted and what was not. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:53, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@QEDK: The following sentences may be added to the article unless there are any objections by the WMF:

A confidential UN audit from 2008 (later referred to as the Executive Summary of the Second Report) which had accused Klein of an "improper relationship" with a woman named Linda Fawaz, was rescinded by a UN appeals tribunal in 2010. According to that report, Fawaz — a 30-year-old Liberian American woman described as the relative of the head of a major timber company — had accompanied Klein to diplomatic functions and had traveled, on occasion, aboard UN flights to Liberia. Fawaz was suspected by UN auditers of passing documents to Charles Taylor. Finding that the auditers had not given Klein the opportunity to respond to those allegations, the report was deemed as inadequate by the tribunal tasked with reviewing it, who found that releasing it ran counter to the UN's mandate that it "only produce, maintain and disseminate investigation reports that have been created in accordance with the requirements of fairness and due process." Klein had initially sought approximately $483,910 in compensation from the tribunal, stating that the loss of income was due, in part, to the UN not reappointing him to another position after leaving his role as Special Representative of the Secretary-General and Coordinator for the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) in April 2005. The tribunal ruled that as a result of Klein's failure to seek administrative review of the decision not to renew his UN appointment, Klein was entitled to no more than one year’s net base salary in addition to $60,000 — the extra amount owing to the UN's failure to "reasonably exercise the discretion to withhold or modify the Executive Summary of the Second Report and for the resultant non-pecuniary harm".

Regards,  Spintendo  18:50, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Spintendo: I think that is pretty good! --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:47, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

 Implemented  Spintendo  23:47, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Considering major removals

Functionally all of the "additional reading" won't act as suitable sourcing for the large amounts of disputable content in the article, failing to be reliable, independent secondary coverage. I'm happy that the medals etc are supported, but most of it doesn't really belong. And that's without factoring in that it's not inline referencing.

Some of the UN stuff could potentially be sourced from the mission's article sources, though they aren't great for telling us about Klein himself in any neutral fashion.

Therefore I'm considering broad removals of this CV-style article until some more suitable sources become available - much of the content seems unlikely to exist without an independent biography. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:01, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: Agreed, there are major issues with this article to the point where removing large parts of it may be necessary for now. Like you said, half of the article reads more like a copied CV with some barely relevant information thrown in than a bibliographic Wikipedia entry, and the other half contains explicit and controversial claims without providing any sources whatsoever. In addition, the unusual formatting and citations lead me to think the text from the article has been largely copied from elsewhere. I will place the appropriate issues in a box. --SabasNL (talk) 10:25, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

The History shows that the article text was partially copied from other sources in cooperation with the person described in this bibliographic entry. Although self-published sources are allowed for bibliographic entries, we have sufficient reason to assume the neutrality of the article is in jeopardy due to overreliance on these sources and a lack of in-line citations. See WP:BLPSELFPUB. This is especially true regarding his UN career and surrounding controversies. I was also unable to verify the UN Dispute Tribunal's judgement mentioned (the only proper source given in the entire text...); the document does not seem to be publicly available (any more). I would appreciate second opinions on what parts of the text should be removed, given the fact that the lack of citations has been a consistent problem since the article's major expansion into a bibliographic entry in 2013 --SabasNL (talk) 11:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Remove everything that you have source concerns about: if that means reducing it to a bare list of his jobs, so be it. This has been a undiluted vanity self-promotion article for a long time. Buckshot06 (talk) 14:11, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Complicit in sex trafficking in Bosnia

Why is there no mention of his involvement in covering up sex trafficking by UN officials as described in the book The Whistleblower by Kathryn Volkovac? 174.29.176.232 (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Biased information

This Wikipedia page reads like an entry into some kind of pageant for ex-world heroes. Not what I am use to reading when searching for information. Interesting how painfully detailed his accolades are, but Bosnian sex trafficking details seem scrubbed. 208.99.103.132 (talk) 17:11, 17 January 2023 (UTC)