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 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 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.
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 has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
I just deleted 14000 bytes from this digressive and disorganized article, and it's still way too long. Please, don't just dump every fact that you can find that's tenuously related to the subject. Long digressions on the Naval Honor Code or the Hurt Report that don't even mention Donald Arthur simply don't belong here, except perhaps as a wikilink. An article is supposed to have some shape and organization, not just be a data dump, no matter how admirably well-researched it is. An article author needs to know how to summarize, how to link, and when to leave stuff out. · rodii · 23:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I pared down this article to bring it into compliance with Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons. The previous version was a gross violation of several basic principles of this policy: It was peppered with original research, worded poorly, and it made use of primary and unreliable sources. The discussion into the subject's motorcycle riding habits (seriously?) and the subsequent use of those "conclusions" to inject clever commentary into further aspects of his career were completely inappropriate. The use of scanned congressional record pages hosted in Commons to support addition of excessive personal details was also inappropriate. And so on. The current version reflects what I could source regarding the subject's career (for example, positions with some healthcare organizations are no longer valid and cannot be verified anymore), plus the "controversy" over his education credentials. To the extent that the bio is now shortened, the issue with the credentials cannot create undue weight, and even if the bio was longer I'm not sure this would merit much more. I'm sure some people believe it does, and if that information can be found and sourced correctly then it can be added after discussing it here or at WP:BLP/N. Wikipedia articles, and especially biographies, are not "whitewashed", but are also not the place to further agendas of any type. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
