Talk:Hyman G. Rickover

Resources section

What's the point of this section? It looks like a dumping ground for someone's research project listing a boat-load of articles either written by Rickover or about Rickover and not very useful or conventional. Toddst1 (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

It's unique, but so was Rickover, who continues to have articles and papers and books written about him in 2019...119 years after his birth. It's a comprehensive, encyclopedic list of resources for current and future students of Rickover and nuclear power, both military and civilian. Assume good faith, please. --67.48.200.162 (talk) 16:02, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Toddst1 (talk) that the article shouldn't function as a "dumping ground" for a big long list of articles that aren't directly relevant to the article in question. Andrew Englehart (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Andrew Englehart:. I don't see any reason to deviate from WP:NOTREPOSITORY, so I'm removing the section. Toddst1 (talk) 00:12, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I performed extensive cleans to this page a few years ago, as it had become riddled with hagiographical and rambling material, and faced opposition from a user in a very similar fashion to what is occurring now. I support continued attempts at cleans here, removing absurd sections like "Words of wisdom", or else this is going to just turn into a giant overly-detailed puff piece again. Palindromedairy (talk) 23:04, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Restored & expanded per citation. Two people do not form a "consensus" to delete this very encyclopedic section. Moreover, using pejoratives like "dumping ground" does not indicate clear & unbiased thinking. --104.15.130.191 (talk) 15:14, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Yep, it's consensus and I have an opinion - hence I am biased. You did not have any support for its restoration and has been removed.

I'll assert that my thinking is clear and we can do without the ad-hominem attacks.

Note that 104.15.130.191 and 67.48.200.162 appear to be the same IP hopper from Austin Texas. Toddst1 (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Culled the "Resources" section for its apparently offending material (Rickover-referencing PhD dissertations, presidential library references, etc.), and limited this content to Rickover's authored, published works and notable, published biographics. As a sidebar, I do not control my IP address (does anyone?). --104.15.130.191 (talk) 14:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

I see three editors (myself now included) specifically objecting to this inclusion, and a fourth editor opining that the article regularly attracts such editing. WP:ONUS requires achieving consensus for the inclusion of disputed material; repeatedly adding it back in over objections is textbook edit warring. Grandpallama (talk) 14:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

You're mischaracterizing the circumstances, Grandpallama. I've edited the section to make it acceptable. HOW can we *possibly* otherwise reach consensus unless people see what's being proposed? In a vacuum...consensus...on what? --104.15.130.191 (talk) 15:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Your additions were discussed and rejected as recently as June. Instead of reinserting them repeatedly, make a case for their inclusion on the talkpage. That's how consensus works. Right now, consensus is against their inclusion, which is in no way a mischaracterization. Change folks' minds, or build a new consensus, but you cannot simply edit war them back in. Grandpallama (talk) 15:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

You're again mischaracterizing the situation. The information posted has been culled for miscellaneous info such as PhD dissertations and presidential library contents regarding the subject of the article. The information NOW posted is the bonafide, authored and published works by the subject of this biographic article. Tell me: What is your line of reasoning against including this? --104.15.130.191 (talk) 16:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)