User talk:Kelseydbrown

Welcome!
Hello, Kelseydbrown, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ɯ ɐ ɔ 💬 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Welcome!
Hello, Kelseydbrown, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:29, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi
Hey Kelseydbrown. I removed the speedy tag on your Broomstick article. Good luck with it, colleague, and let me know if there's anything I can to do to help. Herostratus (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * And I speedy deleted it anyway. You may not accuse potentially living people of being "The scientists that played a role in this operation were all former particitpants in the Nazi Party during WWII." without very, very good sources, which were totally lacking here. The source you had just gave a list of scientists (well, not even that, a list of people involved with the broomsticj scientists) without any evidence that they had ever been nazis (or that they were even Germans). This is a blatant violation of our policy on biographies of living people. while you were right to decline a G1 deletion, please pay attention to such BLP violations as well. Fram (talk) 08:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh jeez did not even catch that. Yeah "former members of the Nazi Party" is not that useful of a designation for these folks, since a lot of people joined the Party either because they had to, or because it was at any rate convenient and useful". So it doesn't tell us anything useful about the person that "was a kind of highish-level German government employee in WW II" already does.


 * And even if you did report it, you would want a really really solid ref for that, since it is a negative thing. See WP:BLP.


 * Don't worry about it Kelseydbrown, we all make these mistakes... I certainly have. It's all fixed, and carry on! Herostratus (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Even worse, it looks from the list of names (and the fact that this was a list of supposedly still living members of the group) that most of them weren't even Germans, but Americans who later joined the group. Of course, they may be Germans who renamed themselves to avoid scrutiny and so on, but there was nothing in the one source to even suggest that this was the case. I'll just give one example of how terribly wrong the article really was: it included Robert Hirschkron. He was a Jew who fled Nazi Germany in early 1940. To label him as a "participant in the Nazi Party" is incredibly insulting and painful. Apart from that, it seems that the broomstick scientists as a group weren't notable, and most or all of them individually weren't notable either. A group of non notable people doesn't make a good Wikipedia article, even if they were involved with something notable. Fram (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know about that last part Fram. Because list articles, which are expressly designed to herd sub-notable entities into group which itself is notable. For instance, Operation Paperclip. It is exhaustively referenced -- someone was very busy. (Many are ref'd to "Astronautix" which I have no idea how good that is, but they say they are "Recipient of the American Astronautical Society's 2015 Ordway Award for Sustained Excellence in Spaceflight Histoy". So for now I'm assuming its an OK ref.)


 * It is hard to read that section, it occupies a lot of the article, and it contains no info beyond the bare names. Certainly, turning that into an article "List of Operation Paperclip participants", with maybe a sentence or two about each one, would be an OK project -- a fine project, actually, IMO -- notwithstanding that the individual people are not individually that notable (actually many have articles here, but even if none did it would still be an OK project). It could possibly be done within the article too, as long as the list was moved to the bottom so as not to unbalance the article, but that would make the article kind of long.


 * So I wouldn't want to discourage Kelseydbrown from going that route if they want. Herostratus (talk) 15:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I would first need to see evidence that the Broomstick Scientists as a group are notable. If the group isn't notable, we shouldn't have a list of members of the group. Fram (talk) 17:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)