Talk:William Owens (Navy SEAL)

President Trump/Rear Admiral Szymanski

User:Leprof 7272: In this edit, you moved President Trump's tribute after Rear Admiral Szymanski's, and your edit summary says "As customary, condolences of Owens' direct military commander are stated first". Customary by what standards please? It seems strange to me that the President does not come first. He is the most important person to have paid tribute to him!Zigzig20s (talk) 08:09, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Owens Sr.

The fact that Owens' father refused to meet with Trump and wants an investigation into his son's death has received widespread coverage in reliable sources.Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:01, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure, in the body of the text, but not in the lede. I agree with User:Natureium, who had trimmed it, but you added it back. If we include the father's reaction in the lede, we should also add something about his widow in the lede, who was very moved by President Trump yesterday. I don't think either are necessary.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:14, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Lede summarizes the article so yeah, in the lede. Also can you provide reliable sources for the widow's reaction? Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

The father's reaction is undue in the lede. Too much weight.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:48, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

And yes, we could add:

• Ackerman, Spencer (March 1, 2017). "Tears of Carryn Owens, widowed by a mission that no one wanted". The Guardian. Retrieved March 2, 2017.

...in the body of the text, like the father's reaction. Not in the lede. His military awards are more significant than his family's (recentist) grief-stricken reactions.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:52, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree that having this in the lead is somewhat selective and gives it undue prominence, so I have trimmed it. It is in the article further down anyway. Edwardx (talk) 11:24, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

One more time. The lede is a *summary* of the article. If it's in the text, it should be summarized in the lede. "Undue" has nothing to do with it.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Please see WP:LEAD: "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents. It is not a news-style lead or lede paragraph." Only the "most important contents", not "If it's in the text, it should be summarized in the lede". Edwardx (talk) 14:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, and the fact that the father refused to meet with Trump and wants an investigation into his son's death is "most important content", based on the widespread coverage this has received in reliable sources.Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

That's a somewhat different argument. And so far, you're in a minority of one. Let's wait and see if anyone else comes along with a view, before deciding whether or not to reinsert it in the lead. Edwardx (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Seems to me this is based on political views towards Trump. I think we should base our edits towards what is best for Wikipedia instead of googling anti-trump/trump admin rhetoric to add to articles, like you have been doing. Also see WP:LEAD --75.66.124.118 (talk) 21:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

DevGru?

Can any point out a source confirming he actually was with DEVGRU (aka SEAL Team Six) and not a regular SEAL Team? Thanks - ^theWOLFchild 14:12, 31 December 2017 (UTC)