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 sourcedmust 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.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
While it appears I was wrong about this article being a hoax it is a direct copy from [1]. Does this constitute copyvio? DesertPipeline (talk) 13:09, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, my attempts to establish if this person is notable are coming up nil here, especially because of the lack of news article. May have to take it to AfD for notability. DesertPipeline (talk) 13:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey DesertPipeline. The Defense Intelligence Agency is a federal government agency, and works of US federal government employees created in the course of their duties are public domain. You may, of course, open a discussion at AfD if you would like. GMGtalk 13:27, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to give you some time to establish notability of the subject. If that can't be done, then yeah, I'll open a discussion at AfD. Good luck. DesertPipeline (talk) 13:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've fleshed it out a little more, and I don't like relying on SNGs to establish notability (and almost never do), but I think there's a good case to be made for WP:NSOLDIER #3, being CSEL of both Cybercom and the DIA, as well as the first person to hold both positions. GMGtalk 14:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, in case they decide to log back on, it's possible that User:MGySgt Scott H. Stalker can point to a great deal more sources that may be available. GMGtalk 14:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
