Talk:Thomas A. Drake

encyclopedic?

Much of the following text from the article caught my eye:

“ The 'Willfull retention' charges are regarding five documents allegedly 'related to the national defense' that were found at Drake's residence. Many media reports state that the charges are for holding classified documents, but the actual law 18 U.S.C. § 793(e) does not use the word "classified". The classification of two of the documents has also been challenged by the defense.

The five documents in question are entitled "What a Success", "the Regular Meetings", "Volume is our Friend", "Trial and Testing", and "Collections Sites".[21] "What a Success" was declassified a few months after Drake was indicted. Defense argued this means charge 1 should be dropped, but plaintiff disagreed. "Regular Meetings" is actually marked "UNCLASSIFIED" and posted on NSANet but prosecution argues the defendant should have known it was really classified. Drake's team also argued that the latter 3 of the 5 documents were part of a collection of thousands of unclassified papers related to the DoD Inspector General Report (mentioned above). Defense argues this means the defendant brought home the material accidentally, not 'willfuly'.[22]

”

looks to me as if it is 1) partially unsourced 2) potentially unencyclopedic 3) possibly contains WP:OR or opinion or statements of "truth" from a wikipedian's perspective 4) overly detailed 5) solely based on WP:PRIMARY sources (an indictment and defense memorandum). I think it should be removed. Shootbamboo (talk) 00:48, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

you can find that in the various secondary sources im just too lazy to go re-reference them. i am going to edit and put back. Decora (talk) 23:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

i have edited out some of it and put it back. this is not really 'primary source', im simply describing what the charges are, not making any interpretation. Decora (talk) 23:51, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Whether or not you're interpreting it (WP:OR), a primary source remains a primary source. Shootbamboo (talk) 02:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Birth date

The infobox lists the birth date as April 22, 1957. Are there any sources? --qbi (talk) 21:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC) I deleted the first reference (NYT article), because the article only lists hist current age. According to that he could either be born in 1957 or 1956 (depending from his birth date). A better reference would be nice. --qbi (talk) 22:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Innocent?

The reference provided for the alleged innocence of Mr. Drake does not state that fact. The reference simply states that Mr. Drake and the DOE had reached an agreement where the later dropped all but one charges in exchange of Mr. Drake pleading for a single (and significantly lesser) charge. The whole thing sounds more like an Op.Ed than a statement of fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elnyka (talk • contribs) 03:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

forgive me for my irrational exhuberance. Decora (talk) 03:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

i have tried to edit and makes less POV, i hope others will edit as well. Decora (talk) 04:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Since the Snowden Incident.

Since the beginning of release of Snowden's files, Drake has become highly active, in giving interviews, speaking at events such as "Restore the Fourth" supporting Snowden's cause.

He spoke at a gathering three days after PRISM was revealed, and gave an impassioned speech regarding his own experiences and his perspectives about the Surveillance State. He compared the NSA to the Stasi. Mr Drake had been an expert on the Stasi in his earlier career.

A notable phrase "you are living in a pre-fascist society and you don' even know it."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m_GvpuVxV8

A second interview, along the same lines.

http://www.reuters.com/video/2013/06/11/ex-nsa-official-on-snowden-and-the-us-sp?videoId=243280439

Speaking at "Restore the Fourth"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QoXVtv0QyQ

--71.20.55.6 (talk) 06:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC) Speaking to "RT"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI10HAkES6g

--71.20.55.6 (talk) 16:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

External links/ Further reading

These were removed from the article:

Further reading

• Thomas Drake speaking after sentencing, Baltimore Sun website, 2011
• No Jail Time in Trial Over N.S.A. Leak, New York Times website, July 15, 2011
• Brief of Amicus Curia Government Accountability Project in support of plaintiffs-appellees and affirmance — An amicus curia filed on December 17, 2012 by Reem Salahi and Hadseel Stormer of Richardson and Renick, LLP on behalf of the Government Accountability Project in the pending United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit case Hedges v. Obama which describes the case of Drake and provides additional sources
• Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (H.R.3694 Title VII)
• Whistleblower Tour C-SPAN video including monologues by Daniel Ellsberg & Tom Drake
• Why are we subverting the Constitution in the name of security?, Washington Post, 2011 Aug 25

Candleabracadabra (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

All of these violate WP:EL, for the record. They may be good references if relevant.Thargor Orlando (talk) 17:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

no they do not. video interviews are a fine primary source, in accordance with guidelines. reliable sources, not incorporated as a reference are fine as well. why do you persist in edit warring over this. 198.24.31.123 (talk) 17:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Please read what links to avoid. They are not primary sources, generally. The Whistleblower Protection Act is not directly about Drake, an op-ed is irrelevant, the C-Span link needs outside software, etc. None of them are valid external links or further reading per our guidelines. Thargor Orlando (talk) 17:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Thomas Andrews Drake. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20130921055135/http://www.vocativ.com/09-2013/should-the-nsa-be-dismantled-an-interview-with-whistle-blower-thomas-drake/ to http://www.vocativ.com/09-2013/should-the-nsa-be-dismantled-an-interview-with-whistle-blower-thomas-drake/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 20 June 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. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 22:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Thomas Andrews Drake → Thomas A. Drake – WP:COMMONNAME; a Google search for "Thomas A. Drake" returns ~23,000 results, versus only ~5,500 for "Thomas Andrews Drake". Furthermore, most popular sources use only the middle name such as:

• The United States Department of Justice: [1]
• Smithsonian magazine: [2]
• The Washington Post: [3] Arbor to SJ (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. Virtually all of the numerous cites appended to the article refer to subject as "Thomas A." —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 23:03, 20 June 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.

Cancer?

As of 2023, has Drake been diagnosed with serious cancer? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 01:24, 12 June 2023 (UTC)