Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/United States Navy systems commands"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Antony-22
(Fixed)
imported>I JethroBT
(all set.)
Line 38: Line 38:
 
[[User:Antony-22|Antony&ndash;'''''22''''']] (<sup>[[User talk:Antony-22|talk]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Antony-22|contribs]]</sub>) 23:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 
[[User:Antony-22|Antony&ndash;'''''22''''']] (<sup>[[User talk:Antony-22|talk]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Antony-22|contribs]]</sub>) 23:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 
*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Thanks for the above {{u|Antony–22}}.  Hm.  So, the article was created in March 2010, though it was basically a list of wikilinks.  The current version is probably better filed under a 5x expansion rather than a new article.  The prose is definitely long enough.  Some of the ''Function and organization'' section is indeed sourced to entirely [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]], which is a concern.  The hook meets length requirements, but the concern is that all of its sources, except for Ref. 13, are [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]] from the system commands' websites, many of which resemble mission statements that support the hook's claim that they "design, construct, and maintain the U. S. Navy's military hardware".  Primary sources should be avoided when trying to make interpretations, but I don't think the hook represents [[WP:OR|original research]] by the author.  That said, I really don't think mission statements are appropriate sources as a general rule.  On that basis, I'd recommend the hook be changed to:
 
*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Thanks for the above {{u|Antony–22}}.  Hm.  So, the article was created in March 2010, though it was basically a list of wikilinks.  The current version is probably better filed under a 5x expansion rather than a new article.  The prose is definitely long enough.  Some of the ''Function and organization'' section is indeed sourced to entirely [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]], which is a concern.  The hook meets length requirements, but the concern is that all of its sources, except for Ref. 13, are [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]] from the system commands' websites, many of which resemble mission statements that support the hook's claim that they "design, construct, and maintain the U. S. Navy's military hardware".  Primary sources should be avoided when trying to make interpretations, but I don't think the hook represents [[WP:OR|original research]] by the author.  That said, I really don't think mission statements are appropriate sources as a general rule.  On that basis, I'd recommend the hook be changed to:
::'''ALT 1''': ... that the six '''[[United States Navy systems commands|systems commands]]''' include chiefs from two of the Navy's eight [[United States Navy staff corps|staff corps]]?
+
::<s>'''ALT 1''': ... that the six '''[[United States Navy systems commands|systems commands]]''' include chiefs from two of the Navy's eight [[United States Navy staff corps|staff corps]]?</s>
 
:QPQ also checks out, so in summary, I'd like to see a few non-primary sources in the ''Function and organization'' section, and a change to the hook. [[User:I JethroBT|<font color="green" face="Candara"><b>I, JethroBT</b></font>]][[User talk:I JethroBT| <sup>drop me a line</sup>]] 22:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 
:QPQ also checks out, so in summary, I'd like to see a few non-primary sources in the ''Function and organization'' section, and a change to the hook. [[User:I JethroBT|<font color="green" face="Candara"><b>I, JethroBT</b></font>]][[User talk:I JethroBT| <sup>drop me a line</sup>]] 22:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  
 
::I have added third-party sources to the ''Function and organization'' section.  In general, it's permissible to take factual statements about an organization's function from their own website; this is certainly not one of those rare cases where an organization has been accused of misrepresenting itself.  I '''strongly''' recommend the original hook, as the term "systems commands" is unfamiliar to most people so a definition is necessary to make it interesting. [[User:Antony-22|Antony&ndash;'''''22''''']] (<sup>[[User talk:Antony-22|talk]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Antony-22|contribs]]</sub>) 01:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 
::I have added third-party sources to the ''Function and organization'' section.  In general, it's permissible to take factual statements about an organization's function from their own website; this is certainly not one of those rare cases where an organization has been accused of misrepresenting itself.  I '''strongly''' recommend the original hook, as the term "systems commands" is unfamiliar to most people so a definition is necessary to make it interesting. [[User:Antony-22|Antony&ndash;'''''22''''']] (<sup>[[User talk:Antony-22|talk]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Antony-22|contribs]]</sub>) 01:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 
+
:::[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Sourcing concerns addressed, and I agree with {{u|Antony-22}}'s arguments above.  I've struck my ALT1. [[User:I JethroBT|<font color="green" face="Candara"><b>I, JethroBT</b></font>]][[User talk:I JethroBT| <sup>drop me a line</sup>]] 02:13, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 02:13, 25 October 2014

United States Navy systems commands

  • ... that six systems commands not only design, construct, and maintain the U. S. Navy's military hardware, but also include the chiefs of two of the Navy's eight staff corps?

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self nominated at 18:18, 23 August 2014 (UTC).

Okay, I suppose that people have been avoiding this nomination because there are a lot of references to look at to support the hook. So I'm going to make it easy and point out the relevant parts of the sources for you.

Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 23:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Thanks for the above Template:U. Hm. So, the article was created in March 2010, though it was basically a list of wikilinks. The current version is probably better filed under a 5x expansion rather than a new article. The prose is definitely long enough. Some of the Function and organization section is indeed sourced to entirely primary sources, which is a concern. The hook meets length requirements, but the concern is that all of its sources, except for Ref. 13, are primary sources from the system commands' websites, many of which resemble mission statements that support the hook's claim that they "design, construct, and maintain the U. S. Navy's military hardware". Primary sources should be avoided when trying to make interpretations, but I don't think the hook represents original research by the author. That said, I really don't think mission statements are appropriate sources as a general rule. On that basis, I'd recommend the hook be changed to:
ALT 1: ... that the six systems commands include chiefs from two of the Navy's eight staff corps?
QPQ also checks out, so in summary, I'd like to see a few non-primary sources in the Function and organization section, and a change to the hook. I, JethroBT drop me a line 22:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
I have added third-party sources to the Function and organization section. In general, it's permissible to take factual statements about an organization's function from their own website; this is certainly not one of those rare cases where an organization has been accused of misrepresenting itself. I strongly recommend the original hook, as the term "systems commands" is unfamiliar to most people so a definition is necessary to make it interesting. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 01:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Sourcing concerns addressed, and I agree with Template:U's arguments above. I've struck my ALT1. I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:13, 25 October 2014 (UTC)