User talk:David Tornheim/FBI surveillance

Pinging Authors for help + one other
and  I have made a copy of your article on FBI Surveillance that is about to be deleted because it is an essay. I intended to bring this up to a state so it can go into mainspace. I am happy to work with you. The first step is to find all the best sources. Anything not mentioned in the mainstream press will probably not be admissable based on WP:RS standards. I will delete everything that is unsourced with is just about everything. So we will have to start basically from scratch, but you can look back on what you had written. From the version history. --David Tornheim (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Are you interested in this subject? --David Tornheim (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, though I documenting this kind of thing is a bit gray hat. I mean white hat in form but gray hat in practice. I mean this reads like a youth program from WWII. Admitally, because we are limited by RS we can't document anything they really didn't want documented so I guess we are in the clear. We can expect resistance on this though. Endercase (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks. As long as it is documented in WP:RS, we should be fine. If you have doubts about what is WP:RS, you can ask me. I won't always know, but the New York Times article was a safe bet. I saw one in the Atlantic too. The scope is also bigger than just that high school program. Any FBI surveillance reported in WP:RS is fair game for this article. --David Tornheim (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Name
Should this be under "FBI surveillance" or should this be under "Don't Be a Puppet: FBI domestic terrorism surveillance program" just thinking about the "optics". Endercase (talk) 14:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's go with the wider scope for now, which will have plenty of material, and then if there is enough material for the smaller scope, then we can propose that as another separate article. We also need to see what happens at the WP:AfD on the current article Fbi_surveillance. (Please don't comment at that WP:AfD or they might say your vote is canvassed).   Also,there may be an article already that has the material for the wider scope, so we should look around so as not to re-invent the wheel.  Probably by looking under categories from the List_of_Americans_under_surveillance.  --David Tornheim (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I just looked and the category Mass surveillance has quite a bit of stuff. We'll have to see what is already there.  --David Tornheim (talk) 14:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks like there is an article that already covers FBI surveillance but it looks pretty weak: Mass_surveillance_in_the_United_States.  So maybe we should work on just this one topic and see if either we can get an article on it, or have it be a section of one of the  existing articles... --David Tornheim (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, maybe we can split sub that into a separate article FBI Surveillance with an article also on Don't be a Puppet (FBI program). Below I have included a proposed !vote for the AfD if you approve of it then I will post it. Endercase (talk) 17:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete or move --- First of all, I was notified by about this discussion so that I can help in his userspace - he specifically requested that I don't comment here to avoid a charge of canvassing. However, given that I disagree with David on this !vote and that the canvassing policy itself is currently under question; I think y'all will be ok with me !voting here (please revert if you are not). I have to agree with  this current title is completely inappropriate for the article contents, the strange capitalization of FBi is a part of that. But, so are the lacking contents given the title. The article also includes a lot of uncited opinion and ethical judgments that are unencyclopedic IMO. If we had RS for those statements that would be great, but we currently do not (in this article anyway). I do think that the Don't be a Puppet program does deserve an article in its own right. I also agree with  that FBI surveillance as a whole is a notable topic and should be developed into a freestanding article (or list) with (a list of) the programs that the public and any potential targets are fully aware of (covered by RS). We must avoid covering anything that is not already firmly in the public domain for encyclopedic and other obvious reasons. Wikipedia is not meant to be a primary source of information anyway, so this should not be a problem.  Endercase (talk) 17:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Possible issue
Do you have the list of original authors? They should be included in an edit sum along with a link to the respective, even if deleted, articles. Just to be safe. Endercase (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)