Jump to content

Talk:Donald Schmuck

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability

[edit]

Well, this article was nominated for deletion and the result was "no consensus". The overwhelming majority of people who contributed to the discussion, however, were in favor of keeping the article. I still, however, have not been convinced of this person's notability. No one in favor of keeping the article provided any evidence that this article satisfies WP:BIO Here are the only two arguments raised during the AfD discussion:

  • Being a Brigadier General alone should be notable enough Well, I'm in the military and I can tell you that 1 stars are not at all uncommon. But you don't have to take my word for it: According to the Census bureau there are 873 active duty admirals or generals currently serving as of Jan 2003. That's not even including the Generals in the Reserves and National Guard which would easily push that number over the 1,000 mark. Those are just Generals who are still in the service. Now imagine adding not only all of the retired Generals, but the ones who have passed away such as General Schmuck. And let's not be US centric! Throw in the equivalent Generals from all of the world's major armed services. Rank is obviously not a feasible test of notability.
  • He led a battalion involved in notable battles in the Korean War Here's an impartial list of all of the units involved in the Korean War He was a company grade officer and there were thousands of them in command during the Korean war, what makes Donald Schmuck singularly notable? Did anyone ever consider Dick Winters (another impressive company grade officer) a notable military figure until Steven Ambrose wrote about a book with him in it? I'm sorry. He's insanely well-decorated and I have no doubt that his actions were vitally important in the immediate sense, but to poorly paraphrase Clausewitz: in the larger scheme of armed conflict nearly all of us in the military are anonymous cogs in the great war machine.

Please, somebody prove me wrong. Put something in this article that satisfies WP:BIO. Gen. Schmuck seems like a remarkable person, but there's nothing in this obituary/article to suggest he's singularly notable. JGardner 00:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My point exactly. I'm considering nominating it again. -- ßottesiηi (talk) 01:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason this sounds so unimpressive is because all the awards get shunted to the end so it's like "he went here, he went there, oh and by the way he got two silver stars and a bunch of other medals." Needs rewriting, not deletion. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 02:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 11:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Donald Schmuck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Donald Schmuck. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:29, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Donald_Schmuck&oldid=1206150553"