This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Military history / Texas Low‑importance 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance). Biography: Military 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 supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Military history: Biography / North America / United States / World War II / Cold War 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 Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force North American military history task force United States military history task force World War II task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) Conservatism 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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 02:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is questioned whether or not Lee Oswald actually shot at General Walker:

"PLAYBOY: If Oswald wasn't a leftist, what motivation would he have had for shooting at another right-winger, Major General Edwin Walker, eight months before the assassination?

GARRISON: If he did it, his motive -- which is to say the motive of those behind him -- was a simple one: to ensure that after the assassination, people would ask this very question and assume that because Oswald had shot at General Walker, he must have been a left-winger. It was just another part of Oswald's cover; if you defect to Russia, pass out pro-Castro leaflets on street corners and take a pot shot at General Walker, who on earth would doubt you're a Communist? Of course, if you really look deeply into this incident, there is no real proof that Oswald was the man who did it; the whole charge rests on the unsupported testimony of Marina Oswald, after she had been threatened with deportation if she didn't "cooperate." It makes little difference, though, whether this incident was prepared in advance to create a cover for Oswald or fabricated after the assassination to strengthen his public image as a Marxist." Source: http://www.maebrussell.com/Garrison/Garrison%20Playboy%20Intvw%201.html 81.155.232.120 (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edwin_Walker" Nickyfann (talk) 18:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Garrison cannot be cited as any type of authority on the JFK assassination, or the attempted assassination of Walker. There is plenty of info about Garrison on the web as to why this is. As to attempt on Walker, Oswald did it and that is abundantly clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.123.225.76 (talk) 00:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the sentence about Kirk Coleman. The newspaper article cited inaccurately reported what Coleman said he saw. FBI Interview of Walter Kirk Coleman. Also, see this filmed interview with Coleman at 2:08. — Walloon (talk) 00:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing on the article about that. The lewd conduct convictions suggest he was homosexual, but he was very conservative, which seriously conflicts with being anything other than straight. Can anyone clarify? F W Nietzsche (talk) 10:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Being "very conservative" may be correlated with remaining "in the closet," but I suspect there is little correlation with being gay or not (for example, see Ernst Röhm). That said, there isn't much of his private life here and it could be expanded. (John User:Jwy talk) 16:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

goooooosee New Mexico Military Institute

What's up with that? Some military inside joke? Grr82 (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was vandalism that has been removed from the article. Gamaliel (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The author seems to have General Edwin Walker mixed up with General Walton Walker. JoeUhrich (talk) 15:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removing the reference to Patton. They were far apart in rank, so it would be more appropriate to say "served under" than alongside. The remainder of the article doesn't mention anything about Patton, which makes any reference to him in the summary out of place. I'm also removing the phrase "highly decorated" as neither the article nor the couple references I checked detail his decorations. Given his rank and the time he probably was highly decorated but it isn't supported here. Robert Bin Peters (talk) 03:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the following paragraph added by User:Petrejo:

According to FBI documents, at 7am on 11/23/1963, less than 24 hours after the assassination of JFK, Edwin Walker was in contact with a German newspaper editor named Helmut Muench. In their conversation, Walker told Muench that Lee Harvey Oswald, who was in prison for killing JFK, was the same man who had tried to kill him, Walker, on April 10, 1963. This story was printed in the German newspaper (the Deutsche NationalZeitung) on 11/29/1963. Walker was asked to testify for the Warren Commission, and in March, 1964, attorney Wesley Liebeler asked Walker how he learned that Lee Harvey Oswald had been his shooter by 11/23/1963, when Marina Oswald did not reveal that to anybody before December, 1963. Walker declined to answer the question, and nothing more was said about it.^[1]

Per the user's statements elsewhere, this addition appears to be pushing a twist on the vast number of JFK conspiracy theories and it is not one touched on that meets the guidelines in WP:RS. If a section alleging that he was involved in the conspiracy is to be created, it needs to state - per the unredacted version of the above citation here - that the FBI documents rely on a "confidential source abroad" who was reiterating what they were supposedly told by Muench (i.e. what Walker told Muench per the confidential source is hearsay) and it also needs to state that Walker did NOT decline to answer the Warren Commission's question (i.e. Walker denies multiple times that he told Muench that Oswald tried to kill him[1]). Location (talk) 06:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the following material added by a blocked ISP (User:92.15.154.130):

To the end of his life, Walker believed that another man had also shot at him, acting as Oswald's accomplice. He spent decades trying to learn the identity of that accomplice. Unsatisfied with the Dallas Police investigation into the shooting, Walker hired a private investigator and Walker personally interviewed witnesses. In his testimony before the Warren Commission, Walker accused the Commission and the FBI of blocking his access to a man named Walter Kirk Coleman.^[1] Colman was a neighbor of Walker who, according to Dallas Police Department records, witnessed two men at the scene of the crime, and speeding away.^[2][3] Walker testified in a letter to the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) that the bullet that the committee called the "Walker bullet" was not the bullet that almost killed him: "It is not the bullet that was fired at me and taken out of my house by the Dallas City Police on April 10, 1963. The bullet you have was not gotten from me or taken out of my house by anyone at anytime."

If Walker believed "to the end of his life" that Oswald and another man were involved in the attempt to shoot him, we need reliable secondary sources discussing that. Cherry-picking primary sources that were generated during the investigation of Oswald to show that Walker believed that violates WP:SYNTH. Similarly, Walker's theory of a substituted bullet only appears in one-way primary source material (i.e. [2]) and has not been discussed in reliable secondary sources. -Location (talk) 18:59, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The exact same material was reinserted by User:84.13.159.6 (diff). I am removing per the above. Acroterion, does this editing pattern suggests that User:84.13.159.6 could be User:92.15.154.130 who you previously blocked? - Location (talk) 19:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I hate sparking debeates more than most but this is exactly what Walker believed and what has been said. If this information is removed then history itself is changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.43.162 (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if Walker believed "to the end of his life" that Oswald and another man were involved in the attempt to shoot him, we need reliable secondary sources discussing that. You are applying your own interpretation of cherry-picked primary source documentation to present that conclusion. Walker stated: "No. I have no knowledge of my counsel trying to speak to him [i.e. Coleman], but I was told by others that tried to get to him that he has been advised and wasn't talking, and that he had been advised not to talk." The WC attorney states: "I want the record to indicate that the Commission, to my knowledge at least, and I think I would know about it, has never told anybody not to talk to you about the attack on you in any way, shape or form whatsoever, and has no intention of doing so. That is point 1. Point 2 is that the Commission is conducting its own investigation into this matter, and has requested the Federal Bureau of Investigation to conduct an investigation into the matter. which it has done at the request of the Commission, and the report will include a finding one way or the other as to whether Oswald was the man who was involved in this attack on you." The FBI had already interviewed Coleman prior to Walker's testimony. Coleman said he saw one man get into one car that was in a church parking and drive off at a "normal rate of speed" and he saw another man make his way to another car in an adjacent parking lot. He said there were about six other cars around.[3] Walker may have been curious to what Coleman saw and how it tied into the investigation but there is no evidence that he believed "to the end of his life" that Coleman's observation of a Mormon church function letting out was tied to a conspiracy. His letter regarding his observations of a bullet he said he saw on television also do not state the belief in a conspiracy. - Location (talk) 21:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"In their conversation, Walker told Muench that Lee Harvey Oswald, who was in prison for killing JFK..."

Oswald was never in prison for killing JFK, because he was never convicted of the crime. He spent a day in jail before Jack Ruby assassinated him, while LEOs were transferring Oswald. 2604:2000:1580:425C:1920:48F:A553:49A1 (talk) 06:52, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Edwin Walker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071010055206/http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0308a.htm to http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0308a.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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} 00:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edwin Walker. 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/20080724161725/http://www.texasalmanac.com/politics/gubernatorial.pdf to http://www.texasalmanac.com/politics/gubernatorial.pdf

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:58, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article says Walker was "the only US general to resign in the 20th century". Didn't Eisenhower resign after receiving the Republican presidential nomination?—Chowbok ☠ 21:43, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to his Wikipedia page, Eisenhower did not resign, he retired.Ttenchantr (talk) 05:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is so easy on Walker and his tie-in to Military Intelligence, as were many of the Dallas Police Department. He is a definite possible co-conspirator. C'mon--this is why I don't give Wikipedia any financial support--you've become just another bad source of history, redacted by the right-wingers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.49.133 (talk) 19:34, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

History is based on primary sources, not "journalism" of any stripe. 70.120.245.43 (talk)

In some of the "documentation needed" gaps. 216.16.85.174 (talk) 20:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article incorrectly refers to my father, Michael Kelly, as an editor at The New York Times. He was an editor, and worked for The New York Times as a journalist, but as far as I know was never an editor there. (His NYT obit refers to him as "A former Washington correspondent for The New York Times".) There's a number of things that could replace New York Times editor; I think the best would be just editor and columnist, although Atlantic editor would work too, or any of a number of job descriptions that can be drawn from his article.

For what it's worth, I think my grandfather's name is likely redlinkable, but that's just a suggestion, not a request. (Per [4], the COMMONNAME is probably Tom Kelly (journalist) over Thomas V. Kelly, but either would be valid.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:20, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Does the edit I just made get it done? Billmckern (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Billmckern: Works for me. :) Thanks! By the way, [5] if anyone wants a contemporaneous source. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 12:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because of disfranchisement of minorities in Texas since the beginning of the century, Democratic Party primaries were the only strongly competitive political contests in the state at that time. 66.30.69.109 (talk) 12:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]