Talk:Thomas Hofeller

NY Times
The NY Times is a RS, and content to the NYT should be restored. That's all. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree and have restored this. Neutralitytalk 20:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

It was a opinionated political piece that makes allegations seem like fact. NY times article should not be restored. Andradejf 21:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andradejf (talk • contribs)

Doctorate
Although one source says that his doctorate was from Claremont-McKenna, both the wikipedia article on Claremont-McKenna and the college's own web site seem to indicate that it does not, and has not ever, granted doctorates. I suspect that his doctorate was obtained elsewhere.Bill (talk) 03:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The way you've edited his education, the article now contradicts its sources. Could fix that, too? -- Pemilligan (talk) 17:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Stephanie Hofeller notability
There is an editor disagreement on whether Stephanie Hofeller, the daughter of Thomas Hofeller, should be named. The two rationales for not naming her, provided in edit descriptions, are "We don't include the names of children unless they are also notable" and "we don't name the children of subjects unless the children are separately notable". What these likely refer to is WP:BIOFAMILY, or perhaps the essay WP:Namechecking. While Stephanie Hofeller is not notable simply by virtue of being the daughter of her father, she is notable for her ongoing role in highly publicized leaks. This may or may not be enough notability for a standalone article, but is certainly notable enough for mention alongside those leaks and as background for those leaks. For example, here are articles by The New Yorker, NPR, and CBS News detailing her ongoing role. djr13 (talk) 05:31, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Though not notable enough for her own article, she's "notable for her ongoing role in highly publicized leaks" which apparently also aren't notable enough for their own article? I think the story of these leaks is told just as well in this article without her name. -- Pemilligan (talk) 06:43, 7 January 2020 (UTC)


 * There are plenty of people notable only for their role in one event, who are named in context of that event but not provided an entire article. See Notability (people) and WP:SINGLEEVENT. djr13 (talk) 03:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I agree that I am not notable enough for my own article. I also agree that I should be mentioned by name in the matter of the publication of The Hofeller Files.

The "severed matter" of ownership of the physical, back-up drives is still awaiting a final order in Raleigh.

As a result, I remain the only person claiming rightful ownership of the materials that is not a party to this case. I am, therefore, the only source of the files (in their entirity) that is not prohibited by standing court order from sharing and/or publishing the unedited files.

This is the first time I have edited a Wikipedia article. My first thought was to simply correct my father's date of death. I then decided to update the article hoping to clarify how and where the files can be viewed and hard copies requested.

I hope my additions meet with the approval of the community (and contain no spelling errors). Thank you, S. Hofeller Shofeller (talk) 05:59, 24 July 2020 (UTC)