Talk:Eric O'Neill

Fair use rationale for Image:ONeill E LR.jpg

Image:ONeill E LR.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Additional media portrayals

In addition to the movie Breach, there were two other portrayals. One was on CBS. I don't recall where the other one was. It would be a good idea if someone more familiar with them would add them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhsimard (talk • contribs) 07:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Rationale for including mention of contribution to DVD commentary

In the description of the movie Breach in the media portrayals section, I had added a statement that O'Neill is on the DVD's commentary audio track, along with the film's director. The statement was undone as lacking source, and that it was "trivial."

I don't agree that it's trivial. To someone interested in knowing more about O'Neill's role in bringing Hanssen down, and that probably describes nearly everyone who reads this article, knowing that the DVD is a source of considerable additional detail and explanation, in O'Neill's own voice, beyond what is in the movie is by no means trivial. I can easily imagine someone who might otherwise be content watching the film on broadcast TV getting the DVD expressly for the sake of that additional information. Dramatizations, particularly of complex stories like this one, nearly always greatly condense the reality through omissions and simplifications, as well as changes for dramatic purposes which are deemed not to compromise the film's authenticity. O'Neill's commentary expands on, and adjusts for, a lot of that, so it's definitely significant.

The following is from a review http://homevideo.about.com/od/dvdreview1/fr/BreachDVDPickaa.htm, which looks like it would be a good choice for the source which I failed to include in my edit.

An Informative Audio Commentary: The Breach DVD provides an excellent feature-length audio commentary by writer-director Billy Ray, and he is ably supported by Eric O'Neill, the real-life man portrayed by Ryan Phillippe in the film. They supply interesting information about Robert Hanssen, and O'Neill says his boss used to tell him that to be Roman Catholic was only the JV, and to be on the varsity, he would have to join Opus Dei. Also, Ray and O'Neill spell out where the movie departs from what actually happened. In addition, they report details that enrich the story. For example, for a long time US law enforcement knew there was a mole, but didn't suspect Hanssen, instead pursuing innocent CIA employee Brian Kelley to the point of derailing his career.

I could put the statement back in, this time including the above for a source, but I don't want to be seen as engaging in an edit war. I'd be very interested to know what Ukexpat, who did the undo, or anyone else might have to say about this.

Rhsimard (talk) 18:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure that about.com is a reliable source for something like this, but go ahead and add the comment back with a citation (using {{Cite web}}) to the about.com page so that others can take a look. – ukexpat (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I added it back in with a couple of references: the quick review at The DVD Journal and the About.com review, both of which have some something descriptive to say about the commentary track and O'Neill's part in it. The only thing I found that was more authoritative was the product page at the NBC/Universal store at http://www.nbcuniversalstore.com/breach-dvd-widescreen/detail.php?p=20422, but it's probably not a great idea to link to a purchase page. Possibly the page at cinema.com http://www.cinema.com/articles/4890/breach-dvd.phtml would be a good choice, but it only mentions the commentary with Ray and O'Neill, while the others give some idea of O'Neill contribution there. Other opinions...?

I also added the citation for The Georgetown Group, which was "citation needed".

Rhsimard (talk) 00:58, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Removal of first-party claim

Under the heading "Post-FBI" the final sentence read "On March 16, 2016, O'Neill was named National Security Strategist for Carbon Black, a leader in Next-Generation Endpoint Security (NGES)" (emphasis added). Terms like "a leader" have no place in an encyclopedia. Furthermore the source for this claim links to a first-party website (that of the company in question) which would disqualify it as being unbiased, and that site is no longer extant; it now redirects to a company named "VMWare" which appears to be related to "Carbon Black". The most recent mention of O'Neill on that website is a PR release from Oct. 20, 2020 in which O'Neill is described as "National Security Strategist, VMware Carbon Black". There is no way to objectively demonstrate that "Carbon Black" is "a leader in" anything, and "Next Generation Endpoint Security" appears to be Carbon Black's jargon, so I have changed "...a leader in Next-Generation Endpoint Security (NGES)" to the more neutral and encyclopedic "...an endpoint security company", linking the latter to the WP article on "endpoint security". Bricology (talk) 00:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)