Talk:Ash Carter/Archive 1

Archive 1

wp is first

I put in the article last week that Ashton is going to be secdef but it was removed. See, one week later it is finally put back in.Insider52 (talk) 15:08, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

That's nice, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Afronig (talk) 02:37, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Rhodes Scholar

Can anyone find out what his college at Oxford was? Why isn't he on List of Rhodes Scholars? Fatidiot1234 (talk) 06:20, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

He was at St. John's College at Oxford. On page 2 of Search for Carter here:

 http://www.rhodeshouse.ox.ac.uk/about/rhodes-scholars/rhodes-scholars-complete-list

 Carter	Ashton	Connecticut	St John's	1976

Yes, he should be on the Wiki list of Rhodes Scholar notables; I'll try to remember to add him if nobody else does, but after after he's confirmed, in order to avoid awkward Secretary of Defense-designate. Mirawithani (talk) 00:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I added him. diff --Bob K31416 (talk) 06:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Democrat?

Is there any evidence of Ashton Carter being a Democrat? It's listed as his political affiliation in the bio box. Chuck Hagel (SoD predecessor) was/is a Republican. I don't see anything in the article mentioning any political aspirations, and I'm wondering if someone put it there because he's now part of the Obama administration. ∴ Naapple TALK|CON 07:57, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I added RS that says he's a democrat. diff --Bob K31416 (talk) 05:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

thanks! ∴ Naapple TALK|CON 06:58, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Repeated deletions of infobox parameter material, overlink, etc.

1. Deletions of infobox material called for by parameters. An editor has repeatedly deleted material from the infobox. Information that is called for by the infobox parameters. Such as alma mater information, profession, and awards.

Such deletions are not appropriate. The infobox parameters call for the information. The fact that a lone editor doesn't personally like that information in the infobox is irrelevant. It's a classic IDONTLIKEIT rationale.

His rationale, on his first deletion? He asserts: "this is much better handled and laid out in the prose of the article." He misunderstands. As I told him, "It is not either-or; the infobox format is certainly appropriate IN ADDITION to prose."

He then again deletes the material after it has been restored, and changes his rationale to a different assertion. That it is in his personal view unwieldy, and he has not seen such entries on other pages. This is what the infobox calls for, it is not unwieldy relative to the size of the article, and his OTHERSTUFFDOESN'TEXIST argument fails for the reason that we don't accept those arguments at WP.

Furthermore, the infobox parameters reflect the consensus of those who work on the infobox. For this lone editor to seek to impose his own personal view that these parameters should not be in the infobox, is for him to edit against consensus.

2. Duplicative, non-existent parameter. He also, now repeatedly, has insisted on adding a "succeeding" parameter person name.

There is no such parameter in this infobox. So there is no name to be added to such a parameter. I'll make it clearer, and now delete the parameter.

Plus--if there were a "succeeding parameter", it would be totally duplicative of the existing filled-out infobox parameter "predecessor".

3. Overlink. He also insists on violating wp:overlink, by a second time linking the name of the person in that parameter who is already linked in the infobox. And by linking "Barack Obama" multiple times in the infobox. And by linking to the "United States." That is all inappropriate.

4. RS support. Carter's resume, and the text of this article, state that Carter attended "Oxford University". The editor has now repeatedly changed the infobox to indicate "St John's College, Oxford." We should follow the resume and the RS-supported text.

I would ask the editor to stop edit-warring over these matters. Others may wish to weigh in. Or if need be, we can seek views at the infobox pages, and at wp:overlink, for example. Epeefleche (talk) 06:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

What did he do in 2014?

The article says, "Carter was Deputy Secretary of Defense from October 2011 to December 2013", and then continues in the next paragraph, "Carter was nominated by President Obama to be the 25th United States Secretary of Defense on December 5, 2014 […] sworn in by Vice President Biden on February 17 [2015]." What did he do from December 2013 to December 2014 (or February 2015)? Why wasn't he Deputy Secretary of Defense after December 2013? Did he quit? Was he fired? Was he demoted? --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Usage of the word 'unanimously'

The article currently states that he was elected unanimously. However, that statement is followed by the statement that the vote was 93-5. Unanimously means that it passed without opposition, where in reality, it faced opposition of five votes. Should this be edited? 168.29.16.50 (talk) 13:12, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Works

I read through the list of eleven works and found one that appears to be repeated.

Specifically, "Ballistic Missile Defense (1984)" is listed twice.

A correction would change the count from eleven to ten. I have never made any corrections to Wiki before, and I don't know if there are two instances of the same book, but it seems unlikely; I can only find one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.238.56.234 (talk) 18:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)