Revision as of 22:52, 4 December 2017 editDHeyward (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,753 edits →Notability← Previous edit |
Revision as of 19:58, 10 December 2017 edit undoWinkelvi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers30,145 edits →Lead wording: new sectionNext edit → |
Line 9: |
Line 9: |
|
At present, the article’s sources are (a) the subject’s CV, (b) a PR piece about a movie, and (c) a press release, un-bylined, from a small town Texas newspaper. He served four years in the U.S. Army, reaching the rank of sergeant -- a fact not mentioned at present in the article. Almost all his press coverage seems to concern his political advocacy. Far from clear that his notability exceeds that of thousands of soldiers and sailors. ] (]) 21:57, 4 December 2017 (UTC) |
|
At present, the article’s sources are (a) the subject’s CV, (b) a PR piece about a movie, and (c) a press release, un-bylined, from a small town Texas newspaper. He served four years in the U.S. Army, reaching the rank of sergeant -- a fact not mentioned at present in the article. Almost all his press coverage seems to concern his political advocacy. Far from clear that his notability exceeds that of thousands of soldiers and sailors. ] (]) 21:57, 4 December 2017 (UTC) |
|
:They made a movie about him and his account. Easily meets GNG. If there are thousands of other soldiers, then please begin writing about them. What even brought you to this article? --] (]) 22:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC) |
|
:They made a movie about him and his account. Easily meets GNG. If there are thousands of other soldiers, then please begin writing about them. What even brought you to this article? --] (]) 22:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Lead wording == |
|
|
|
|
|
The initial wording in the lead was just changed from "...is an American author and speaker as well as a former U.S. Army Ranger and CIA security contractor" to "...is an American author and speaker. He is also former U.S. Army Ranger and previously worked as ] security contractor." My personal preference is for the first version. It seems to me that the description should be in one sentence, that "is also" is usually always a bad choice for encyclopedic tone, and that "former" speaks to his career as a Ranger and CIA contractor. Having two sentences describing who he is looks clumsy to me as well as the new wording. Thoughts? '''<span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span>''' ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 19:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC) |
At present, the article’s sources are (a) the subject’s CV, (b) a PR piece about a movie, and (c) a press release, un-bylined, from a small town Texas newspaper. He served four years in the U.S. Army, reaching the rank of sergeant -- a fact not mentioned at present in the article. Almost all his press coverage seems to concern his political advocacy. Far from clear that his notability exceeds that of thousands of soldiers and sailors. MarkBernstein (talk) 21:57, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
The initial wording in the lead was just changed from "...is an American author and speaker as well as a former U.S. Army Ranger and CIA security contractor" to "...is an American author and speaker. He is also former U.S. Army Ranger and previously worked as CIA security contractor." My personal preference is for the first version. It seems to me that the description should be in one sentence, that "is also" is usually always a bad choice for encyclopedic tone, and that "former" speaks to his career as a Ranger and CIA contractor. Having two sentences describing who he is looks clumsy to me as well as the new wording. Thoughts? -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 19:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)