Is that an edit of the article, or a whitewashing of the article? It turns out that she is most notable for the relief of command, and the blanket removal of material from the article is not adhering to WP:UNDUE, but seems more to be a whitewashing of the article.
What you have done is removed any context of the dismissal from the article, and that is not a good thing. Russavia On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Laura Hale <la...@fanhistory.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Seems like another 1E candidate. The over-emphasis on the controversy at >>> the end of her career can be addressed by wiping out most of the detail, or >>> by removing the article entirely (since the notability argument is somewhat >>> fragile, and all the references about the subject relate to her dismissal). >>> >> >> Coincidentally, others thought that too! :) It was taken to AfD and the >> MilHist project determined she was notable based on her being the first >> woman to command the ship type. :) If you want to try that Nathan, you can >> but your efforts and the efforts of other men like Andreas are probably >> better spent improving the article about her to remove this material. I >> eagerly anticipate y'all working together on this article as you've both >> identified it needs work. :) >> >> -- >> twitter: purplepopple >> blog: ozziesport.com > > > I've already edited it, but thanks as always for your confidence. > > ~Nathan > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > _______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
