Talk:James F. Amos: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:52, 14 April 2011

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Military Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the military biography work group.

Military history: Aviation / Biography / North America / United States C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Military biography task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

planning guidance

http://www.stripes.com/news/marine-commandant-vows-to-make-corps-lighter-more-mobile-1.123396

I didn't see anything really noteworthy here. He seems to be continuing down existing paths with a lot of studies due next year. Hcobb (talk) 21:00, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DADT Information

Okay, we now have an edit war. What do you suggest we do about it? BTW, sorry about your wife’s health problems and thanks for your service. I’m a Navy veteran of the Vietnam War. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lahaun (talk • contribs) 17:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just put it in the body. It's not that complicated. It's not appropriate for the lead at all, which has been my only objection. bahamut0013^words _deeds 17:46, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Lahaun that the material is appropriate for the article. I agree with Bahamut that the lead might be the best place for it. I don't agree that the appropriate action to take when one finds material that is appropriate for the article but not in the right place is to delete the information. We should all strive to improve the article. I don't think that it is better with the material absent than it is with it incorrectly placed. If you have a clear idea of where the material would better be placed, you should place it there. Sterrettc (talk) 19:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're not happy, with the reformatting, please explain why here, without undoing it.Lahaun (talk) 23:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC) Regarding 'born again Christian': I do not see the cited material use that terminology. Neither do I see General Amos using that terminology in the quote contained in the cited material. While there is nothing necessarily wrong with the terminology itself (all Christians are 'born again in Christ), it seems it is most often used by non-Christians to deride and dismiss Christians. I do not see where General Amos's religion has anything to do with his service as Commandant - the reason he has an article. If there is some connection with 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' it should be made clear. Otherwise, I think it violates NPOV and I do not see any reason for it here.[reply]

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 ::I agree with Lahaun that the material is appropriate for the article.  I agree with Bahamut that the lead might be the best place for it.  I don't agree that the appropriate action to take when one finds material that is appropriate for the article but not in the right place is to delete the information.  We should all strive to improve the article.  I don't think that it is better with the material absent than it is with it incorrectly placed.  If you have a clear idea of where the material would better be placed, you should place it there. [[User:Sterrettc|Sterrettc]] ([[User talk:Sterrettc|talk]]) 19:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 If you're not happy, with the reformatting, please explain why here, without undoing it.[[User:Lahaun|Lahaun]] ([[User talk:Lahaun|talk]]) 23:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
+Regarding 'born again Christian': I do not see the cited material use that terminology. Neither do I see General Amos using that terminology in the quote contained in the cited material. While there is nothing necessarily wrong with the terminology itself (all Christians are 'born again in Christ), it seems it is most often used by non-Christians to deride and dismiss Christians. I do not see where General Amos's religion has anything to do with his service as Commandant - the reason he has an article. If there is some connection with 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' it should be made clear. Otherwise, I think it violates NPOV and I do not see any reason for it here.