Talk:Board of Veterans' Appeals

Redirect
Dear ) I noted that you recently undid the page revision I made to the Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals page. Your edit simply says, "see page history", to which, I did. As I noted in my edit summary, of all the officials listed in the Template Navbox, the Chairman is the only one without a dedicated page for the officeholder. An individual page for the Chairman IS acceptable, per WP:PAGEDECIDE. Page view analysis for all four pages shows a comparable number of monthly views between the group, which would indicate that each page shares a comparable level of interest.

I intend on restoring the page again, but if you care to share your reasons against, I am all ears.

--2603:9001:8B00:4C8D:3401:E28E:5E7D:EE4C (talk) 22:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, the reason I noted "see page history" is just a few edits before you had split this content off, I had merged it. Even now, with the two articles combined, (and new content added) the page is only 28kb. The new page, Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals was only 6.4 kb. Hardly enough content to justify a fork. Readers are served better with the single article. It was like that for 5 years... so there's plenty of WP:IMPLIEDCONSENSUS to support that. (imo) -  w o lf  01:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @Thewolfchild,
 * Your argument that there is not enough content to justify a fork fails, considering the other pages in the VA sub-cabinet space (Deputy Secretary and the Undersecretary for Memorial Affairs, Health and Benefits)  all  come in under 10kb. In fact, the Under Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Benefits page comes in a mere 5.5kb, less than what the Chairman's page would have been, with the new additions (mainly because of the lack of a table listing the undersecretaries).  If readers are served better by the unified article for this namespace, then, certainly, the other neighbors should be served the same?
 * In response to your point regarding consensus, remember that consensus can change. A five-year period of no changes to an article occurred between edits doesn't necessarily impart a strong enough form of consensus to prevent changes. See WP:WEAKSILENCE.  My edit was merely a disagreement with your edit, which indeed challenges the belief of consensus.  Respectfully yours, KevCor360 (lets talk) 19:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, those other pages should probably be merged here as well. A more complete, detailed, single article with all the info in one place would serve the reader better. I don't really see why every mail room clerk and janitor at the VA needs their own stub. - w o lf  20:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That's a bit disingenuous. Also, considering every other federal executive department has individual pages for their Deputy and Undersecretary (and some even have Assistant Secretaries), in essence, you're arguing that EVERY subagency that has a page should merge their officeholder page into the main page.
 * And since we are at a stalemate on the discussion here, I have referred this to RFD. Respectfully yours, KevCor360 (lets talk) 00:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, creating RfDs while there's an active discussion, (but also unilaterally deciding the discussion is over, is not exactly engaging in good faith.) OSE arguments are not necessarily the best way to make content decisions. The Chairman page content was merged five years ago because that seemed the best way to complete this article. The other sub-chair pages you keep mentioning could easily be added here as well, and perhaps should be. They seem to follow the same format, a small blurb-type lead, with some duplicate content, followed by a list of previous postion holders. Why keep and maintain all these pages when all this content could be collated into a single, more comprehensive and complete article. That would serve the readers better, and the purpose of this project is the readers, not the editors. - w o lf  13:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

"Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Chairman of the Board of Veterans& and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 26 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Respectfully yours, KevCor360 (lets talk) 00:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)