Talk:Patrick J. Donahoe

Editing of Patrick J. Donahoe

There have been a number of edits to this page in the past week and I wanted to point a few things out: I've removed the Villanova reference because it's a dead link. Since that reference is the one that gives the names of his children, I've removed them from the page for lack of citation. Also: since they're minors, and the family has received *death threats* in light of recent publicity and continuing to allow the children's names to be published is inviting further negative attention, the names should not be returned to the entry. Please respect the family's wishes. Thank you for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Broadcastmike (talk • contribs) 2 August 2021 (UTC)

If that was the case, that should have been stated immediately upon your first revert. Additionally, with said claim there should have been further information with links on if the Donahoe family has specifically been receiving death threats. Transparency such as this can help us understand why and how you made the edit and how a consensus can be reached. I maintain that I believe that your edit was in good faith to protect the general's privacy now that I have read up what (presumably) caused this recent publicity, which itself should have been detailed and explained firsthand. Not all of us will know immediately about recent or ongoing events relating to any given person at any given time. P.S. @David O. Johnson: you may want to give your input on this. SuperWIKI (talk) 15:28, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Maliepa: Is there a specific WP policy on not including information for the sake of publicity or inviting further negative reception? While I sympathize with the situation stated above, I am not 100% certain that not including it (should other reliable, perennial sources be found with such names) would be helpful for maintaining complete information in the article. This source mentions his wife, for one. While I am subtly in agreement of not restoring the names for now in light of the general's controversial Twitter activity which I just found out about (that again, should have been cited as the "recent publicity" in question), should the spouse's name be restored in future? In light of this, I also believe a section relating to this controversy (if enough references) can be found, is in order. SuperWIKI (talk) 15:37, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@SuperWIKI: I believe that the spouse's name and number of children should be included if they are reported in a biographical or background publication. The names of minor children are not necessary even if they happen to be included in such a source. The obituary of a parent might also include this information. Spouses of general officers often perform significant activities at the military posts where they reside. – Maliepa (talk) 17:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Maliepa: Should I add the spouse's name back then? SuperWIKI (talk) 01:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@SuperWIKI: You can if you also put back the Villanova deadlink reference or have a suitable substitute which cites her name. – Maliepa (talk) 02:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I have decided to re-add the Villanova deadlink with an archive link. While I do agree that the subject of this article is entitled to have his children's names not published here (and it is also not necessary in the context of the article, since they are not notable), the reference still provides evidence of the claim that he has three children (which is not present in the reference for his wife's name), and is therefore appropriate.

UPDATE: It seems that I misread the reference for MG Donahoe's wife's name, and it does in fact state that he has three children, however the deadlink, since it has been revived by an archive link, is still relevant, and so I will leave it there. 49.194.27.2 (talk) 07:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

49.194.27.2 (talk) 07:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)