This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
William Trump article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 8 February 2013, it was proposed that this article be moved to William Trump. The result of the discussion was page not moved. |
Another contributor placed a {{ prod}} on this article -- asserting, in part, that this article didn't cite "independent references". A few days ago they placed a {{ prod}} on Richard Dixon (USCG), who, like William Trump, had a Sentinel class cutter named after him. All Coast Guard Sentinel class cutters are named after members of the Coast Guard, or its precursor services, who have been recognized for their heroism.
That contributor and I had a disagreement as to whether articles that cover an individual, drafted by the organization they were once a member of, could be considered "independent".
I asked for third party opinions at WP:RSN#Independent sources. I informed the tagger, who, without informing anyone at that first discussion, asked for the opinions of his or her colleagues, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Independent ref question.
In my opinion, a consensus as to whether Dixon was dependent or independent of the Coast Guard references has not been reached. In my opinion, that makes it premature to tag a second article with a prod with the same justification as the first.
I am going to assume that asking for the opinion of his or her colleagues at a second forum, when I had already raised the issue at WP:RSN was not a conscious effort to go " WP:Forum shopping", merely an innocent mistake.
I presume the Tampa Bay Times is the one reference they acknowledge as "independent". For what it is worth Military Times's about page explicitly described itself as: "The trusted, independent source for news and information for the military community " If the military in the title of this publication tricked them into thinking it was a government publication they were mistaken. The about page of the Defense Media Network also describes itself as an independent publication. Geo Swan ( talk) 15:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
As an article for the ship has not been created, perhaps it would be best for this article to be made into a redirect to Sentinel class cutter, until the time when the ship's article is created. This would preserve a history, including a record of the reliable sources, of this article that can be later used on the article about the ship.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 06:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved. There's no support here for this proposal. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 20:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
William Trump → USCGC William Trump (WPC 1112) – Subject not notable per WP:SOLDIER; ship notable per WP:MILUNIT. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
But these are exceptional cases.
Nominator keeps repeating that Trump is not notable per WP:SOLDIER. This is incorrect. More correctly WP:SOLDIER says Trump would not be notable solely for being awarded a Silver Star. That is a very different statement. Most biographical articles are about individuals whose notability was based on multiple factors. Trump's courage is also being recognized by having a $50 million vessel named after him.
Our nominator has made assertion here on this talk page, and elsewhere, that strongly imply they hold the position any award that does not confer total notability confers zero notability. This both doesn't make sense and is counter to a decade of prior notability determinations.
There have been some very committed contributors who made series of articles that really didn't say anything, that all ended up being deleted. There was a series of thousands of articles on Diplomatic relations between X and Y, where X and Y were two random nation-states. For most of those stubs no references existed to show scholars or journalists had ever written about relations between those two nations, and almost all of those articles ended up being deleted. Articles about cutters where there is nothing to say about them that isn't covered in the article about the class are of no more value than those diplomatic stubs. Geo Swan ( talk) 10:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
William Trump article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 8 February 2013, it was proposed that this article be moved to William Trump. The result of the discussion was page not moved. |
Another contributor placed a {{ prod}} on this article -- asserting, in part, that this article didn't cite "independent references". A few days ago they placed a {{ prod}} on Richard Dixon (USCG), who, like William Trump, had a Sentinel class cutter named after him. All Coast Guard Sentinel class cutters are named after members of the Coast Guard, or its precursor services, who have been recognized for their heroism.
That contributor and I had a disagreement as to whether articles that cover an individual, drafted by the organization they were once a member of, could be considered "independent".
I asked for third party opinions at WP:RSN#Independent sources. I informed the tagger, who, without informing anyone at that first discussion, asked for the opinions of his or her colleagues, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Independent ref question.
In my opinion, a consensus as to whether Dixon was dependent or independent of the Coast Guard references has not been reached. In my opinion, that makes it premature to tag a second article with a prod with the same justification as the first.
I am going to assume that asking for the opinion of his or her colleagues at a second forum, when I had already raised the issue at WP:RSN was not a conscious effort to go " WP:Forum shopping", merely an innocent mistake.
I presume the Tampa Bay Times is the one reference they acknowledge as "independent". For what it is worth Military Times's about page explicitly described itself as: "The trusted, independent source for news and information for the military community " If the military in the title of this publication tricked them into thinking it was a government publication they were mistaken. The about page of the Defense Media Network also describes itself as an independent publication. Geo Swan ( talk) 15:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
As an article for the ship has not been created, perhaps it would be best for this article to be made into a redirect to Sentinel class cutter, until the time when the ship's article is created. This would preserve a history, including a record of the reliable sources, of this article that can be later used on the article about the ship.-- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 06:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved. There's no support here for this proposal. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 20:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
William Trump → USCGC William Trump (WPC 1112) – Subject not notable per WP:SOLDIER; ship notable per WP:MILUNIT. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
But these are exceptional cases.
Nominator keeps repeating that Trump is not notable per WP:SOLDIER. This is incorrect. More correctly WP:SOLDIER says Trump would not be notable solely for being awarded a Silver Star. That is a very different statement. Most biographical articles are about individuals whose notability was based on multiple factors. Trump's courage is also being recognized by having a $50 million vessel named after him.
Our nominator has made assertion here on this talk page, and elsewhere, that strongly imply they hold the position any award that does not confer total notability confers zero notability. This both doesn't make sense and is counter to a decade of prior notability determinations.
There have been some very committed contributors who made series of articles that really didn't say anything, that all ended up being deleted. There was a series of thousands of articles on Diplomatic relations between X and Y, where X and Y were two random nation-states. For most of those stubs no references existed to show scholars or journalists had ever written about relations between those two nations, and almost all of those articles ended up being deleted. Articles about cutters where there is nothing to say about them that isn't covered in the article about the class are of no more value than those diplomatic stubs. Geo Swan ( talk) 10:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)