This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
Partly done A USA Today article was a better reference for the same claim, so that sentence is now properly referenced.
I also noticed that the extensive and elaborate Awards and decorations section is wholly unreferenced, and a brief search did not find a source. So I flagged that, and the problem of referencing his military ribbons and medals remains unfinished. -- M.boli (talk) 13:21, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've recently had the pleasure of discussing the issue of citing military awards and decorations at length on the Jonny Kim talk page.
Unless you are of a different opinion, I say we have a photo of Waltz at the point of his retirement already in the article, and it's fairly trivially easy to identify the awards he wears. If he is wearing unearned awards, that is a matter for the journalists, Waltz is an acceptable source WP:ABOUTSELF.
Military figures who have worn unearned decorations have been found out before (famously in the case of the controversy between David Hackworth and Michael Boorda) and if that comes to pass in this case, then we'll have better sources and the article will be edited. But short of a pdf of his DD-214 suddenly appearing, it's very unlikely that a complete service summary detailing each ribbon and badge will be available, so the maintenance tag is not productive. Ihpkt (talk) 00:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am of a different opinion. Claims of military honors, as with any awards, would seem to hit point 1 of WP:ABOUTSELF -- "The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;" And if reliable sources are not covering his honors, then we do not need them here. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 01:15, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, we put into that category things that could be seen as boastful. Someone saying that they attended Jones High School is not boastful; someone saying that they graduated there at the top of their class would be. In large part, it reflects statements that someone could have a reasonable reason to lie about. Claims of having received honors fit into that -- as the fact that some folks lie about it reflects. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 02:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am quite dubious that the array of badges in the Awards and Decorations section of this article matches the retirement photo. That the photo and the article seem to differ is, to my mind, a pretty good argument that we shouldn't be including the information without a good reference. Claiming the information could possibly be figured out is a long way from showing a reference. As well as encouraging OR.
I see nothing the reportage on Waltz which in any way hinges or touches on the badges he sports. I think the section is best deleted. -- M.boli (talk) 02:30, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What part of that is OR? Information can be presented visually.
I just compared the photo and the awards section and there are 2 discrepancies with ribbons: he was awarded a Legion of Merit at his retirement ceremony (which was probably not known at the time that the section was created), and his Army Reserve Overseas Training Ribbon is missing the numeral 2. All the ribbons correspond to the photo. Other than that, whoever created the award section did not include the skill badges & tabs for Basic Parachutist, Pathfinder, Ranger, and Special Forces.
Are we to include a citation footnote referencing your special badge divination skill? It seriously is not the same as having a published reference that anyone can check. -- M.boli (talk) 02:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a specific decoration you feel has been misidentified?
While you may not be familiar with the differences between mathematical symbols—perhaps it is all Greek to you!—others are familiar with the differences. Generally, editors are not expected to make contributions to fields they do not understand. These aren't special claims, and editors in military biography will collaborate as they have done on numerous articles before this one to ensure that the badges are identified correctly.
You may not be a reader in this category who can or cares to interpret ribbons for a service summary, but I assure you that frequent readers of milbio can, and appreciate the inclusion in the article.
I personally do not go around asking mathwiki to add footnotes so we can really be sure the symbol in question is an integral, they would just link me to the article on integrals, just like I would link you to the article on whatever you think is misidentified, and it would be clear that this is a non-issue. Ihpkt (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you plan to reference his badges by citing his retirement photo with {{cite av media}}? How to reference the divination step, which translated the photo to the badge names? If there is a math equation in a Wikipedia article, it should have come from somewhere, with a reference. -- M.boli (talk) 16:01, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you plan to reference his badges by citing his retirement photo with {{cite av media}}? Not really necessary. It's cited as a Tweet currently, but I wouldn't oppose reformatting the citation.
How to reference the divination step, which translated the photo to the badge names? We don't reference "steps" we reference sources. I am describing what is in the source. The entire point of military decorations is that they are unambiguously recognizable to communicate information visually. On top of this, the appearance and context of every U.S. military decoration is already extensively documented and cited on Wikipedia:
If there is a math equation in a Wikipedia article, it should have come from somewhere, with a reference. In some cases, such as unique equations beyond simple algebra, sure. What you will not find is a citation every time a math symbol is used to prove the identity of the symbol. The appropriate place for those citations is a page serving as a directory of math symbols, they do not need to be reproduced on every page that uses the symbols.
To make a different analogy, a citation is not necessary for an editor to write that the third letter in the word здравстьвуйте is the letter "р" from the Russian alphabet, which is phonetically similar to "r" in the Latin alphabet and should not be confused with the letter "я". All of that information must be verifiable, of course, but no citation is needed for identifying a specific letter in a specific instance, because these alphabets are already extensively documented. Similarly, the system of visual information for military awards is already documented, which is why I keep asking you which decoration you are having trouble with. A Combat Infantryman Badge or Pathfinder Badge is extremely easy to identify, Special Forces and Ranger are even spelled out, so calling this process divination is just bordering on absurd to me. Do you want a citation for the "divination process" used to determine that the subjects in the photos of giraffes are in fact giraffes?
If every page assumed that readers had zero background in the subject, or that every single fact had to be presented syllogistically like a mathematical proof, articles would be so dense, repetitive, unreadable, and excessively cited that the project would be useless.
I can't really find anything in your comment that has to do with the disposition of the matter at hand. Clearly you object to this, but I'm still trying to figure out what your substantive point is, I don't think you've actually expressed one. It would help if you could be more precise, ideally making reference to specific language in specific policies and guidelines. Ihpkt (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The request is to add the woman's name to the Personal life section. The last sentence currently reads: Waltz also has a daughter from a prior marriage. However she does not have a Wikipedia page, I found no evidence of notability. I'm pretty sure we keep the names of non-notable family members out of the biography pages. -- M.boli (talk) 18:24, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
.svg)
Partly done A USA Today article was a better reference for the same claim, so that sentence is now properly referenced.
