Talk:Frederick C. Roecker, Jr.: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger |
imported>Eric M Gearhart (Sandbox & Maintainability) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
-Jacob Roecker | -Jacob Roecker | ||
:If you are looking just to "play with articles no one else will be editing" there is always your user Sandbox page, e.g. [[User:Jacob_F._Roecker/Sandbox]]. I have to agree with Larry on this one... is your dad notable enough for an encyclopedia entry? [[User:Eric M Gearhart|Eric M Gearhart]] | |||
== formatting == | == formatting == | ||
Hi Jacob, | Hi Jacob, | ||
Great entry there, good use of family history. I would just say, instead of the "double header" format, it's best for consistency to just stick with the standard CZ entry style, which calls for the article name first and in '''boldface''' as the first word or phrase of the first sentence. The extra headers make it seem as though the article's subject is on a sort of textual pedestal. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 09:09, 25 April 2007 (CDT) | Great entry there, good use of family history. I would just say, instead of the "double header" format, it's best for consistency to just stick with the standard CZ entry style, which calls for the article name first and in '''boldface''' as the first word or phrase of the first sentence. The extra headers make it seem as though the article's subject is on a sort of textual pedestal. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 09:09, 25 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
== Maintainability == | == Maintainability == | ||
[[CZ:Maintainability|Maintainability]] is one issue that needs discussion. There's no ''obvious'' issue of self-promotion, and we can debate whether you, Mr. Roecker, should be a [[CZ:Policy on Topic Informants|topic informant]]. The question is whether your Dad just like most other Dads, so that we would have to let everybody write articles about their Dads, or does your Dad fall into a category of article subjects that we can expect to maintain? | [[CZ:Maintainability|Maintainability]] is one issue that needs discussion. There's no ''obvious'' issue of self-promotion, and we can debate whether you, Mr. Roecker, should be a [[CZ:Policy on Topic Informants|topic informant]]. The question is whether your Dad just like most other Dads, so that we would have to let everybody write articles about their Dads, or does your Dad fall into a category of article subjects that we can expect to maintain? | ||
| Line 21: | Line 20: | ||
Sent a mail about this to CZ Military Workgroup editor James Whinnery. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 10:05, 25 April 2007 (CDT) | Sent a mail about this to CZ Military Workgroup editor James Whinnery. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 10:05, 25 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
:I'm in the Army Active Duty right now and I can tell you that there are many deputy commanding generals and many Silver Star recipients through history. A more plausible list would include possibly "Congressional Medal of Honor" recipients, however that number is also in the hundreds. Jacob, I understand that this is your dad and his career is important, however as Larry said is this article notable in an encyclopedia, and is it maintainable? [[User:Eric M Gearhart|Eric M Gearhart]] | |||
Revision as of 09:41, 25 April 2007
I am aware that submitted articles aren't supposed to be self-promoting or about less-than-prominent people. Since this is the second article I've generated--and I need the practice--I decided to go with something that I knew. This biography is from my father, and the photos from our family archives.
Sorry if this article is too self-promoting, but I'd rather play around with how to make articles on something I know no one else will be editing. :-)
Thanks!
-Jacob Roecker
- If you are looking just to "play with articles no one else will be editing" there is always your user Sandbox page, e.g. User:Jacob_F._Roecker/Sandbox. I have to agree with Larry on this one... is your dad notable enough for an encyclopedia entry? Eric M Gearhart
formatting
Hi Jacob, Great entry there, good use of family history. I would just say, instead of the "double header" format, it's best for consistency to just stick with the standard CZ entry style, which calls for the article name first and in boldface as the first word or phrase of the first sentence. The extra headers make it seem as though the article's subject is on a sort of textual pedestal. Russell Potter 09:09, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
Maintainability
Maintainability is one issue that needs discussion. There's no obvious issue of self-promotion, and we can debate whether you, Mr. Roecker, should be a topic informant. The question is whether your Dad just like most other Dads, so that we would have to let everybody write articles about their Dads, or does your Dad fall into a category of article subjects that we can expect to maintain?
I notice that General Roecker was a Deputy Commanding General and also a Silver Star recipient. Question to the Military Workgroup: how many U.S. military personnel have achieved such ranks and distinctions, and can we expect to have articles about all of them? If so, on those grounds I would maintain that the article is maintainable. If not, we should investigate whether General Roecker had some further special distinctions that would place him into a maintainable class; and if not, I'm afraid we should probably delete the article on grounds of maintainability. But I'd prefer that we not do so, if we can help it. --Larry Sanger 10:00, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
Sent a mail about this to CZ Military Workgroup editor James Whinnery. --Larry Sanger 10:05, 25 April 2007 (CDT)
- I'm in the Army Active Duty right now and I can tell you that there are many deputy commanding generals and many Silver Star recipients through history. A more plausible list would include possibly "Congressional Medal of Honor" recipients, however that number is also in the hundreds. Jacob, I understand that this is your dad and his career is important, however as Larry said is this article notable in an encyclopedia, and is it maintainable? Eric M Gearhart