Talk:Secretary of the Navy (U.S.)

From Citizendium
Revision as of 01:54, 1 June 2008 by imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (→‎Handling the incumbent: new section)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Incumbent [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition U.S. civilian official, of Assistant Secretary of Defense rank, who heads the U.S. Department of the Navy and to whom the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps report [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Military [Categories OK]
 Subgroup category:  United States Navy
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

This article has to be renamed so that a country is stated in the title. We have already been through these discussions on the Forum. Martin Baldwin-Edwards 21:32, 31 May 2008 (CDT)

Handling the incumbent

Since I saw a note about removing the Winter material, but not a link to a new page, I created a tab for "incumbent". For articles that speak specifically about the responsibiities of a position, it seems reasonable to use subtabs:

These both seem user-friendly ways of putting relevant background information into an easily accessible form. They also remind future authors of information that needs to be kept current, which might be less likely if there were only a separate page titled for the individual's name and a link somewhere in the text.

With this method, which I regard as a text, an author that saw a piece of information relevant to the "secretary of the navy" could quickly decide if it is relevant to the position or a person,and then know where to go to put the information.

I would not suggest using "incumbent" in articles that are principally about organizations rather than positions in the organization, although Related Articles might be a way to organize this information.

Again, this is an experiment in presentation. Nothing is lost, while I did not immediately see to where the Winter material moved, just that it had been deleted.

There do seem to be differences of opinion about the use of subtabs versus main page content. I believe, for example, in having, in the main article, only references/footnotes for inline citations; general reading, with no specific section to which it applies, seems more logical at a biblography or external links tab/subpage, with annotation. Howard C. Berkowitz 02:54, 1 June 2008 (CDT)