Talk:David M. Gonzales/Archive 1

message: Your article looks like its off to a great start. -- Jreferee 10:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nice article

message: I much prefer the black and white photo in the infobox, which was the original image, to the current colorized image. The image is much more classic and "military".  (Examples below).  If no one objects, I am going to change it back. — ERcheck (talk) 23:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As creator of the article and downloader of both versions of the photo, I fully agree with ERcheck.  I believe that the original image without any touch ups would be more proper. Tony the Marine 00:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, I prefer using the techno-color pic up top.  Currently, we now have the same pic twice on the page.  Plus the colorized pic adds pop to the top of the article and invites readers to continue reading.  I know this is merely a style issue, but I liked it better before the change.--Evb-wiki 15:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the uploader of the color images, I do like the colorized image, but comparing them side by side (see above), the black and white photo gives more honor to Gonzales and better characterizes the time he served. Pop is important in celebrity articles, and Medal of Honor recipients have celebrity.  However, reverence is important in Medal of Honor articles.  In addition, use of the same photo is justified by the explanation in the article.--Jreferee 18:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I actually do like the b&w pic better (and, upon second glance, it is much more dignified); however, I'm bothered by the duplication of the image on the page.  Also, if the controvercy has been solved by now having the correct photo at the Pentagon, couldn't we purge the article of the incorrect photo as well?--Evb-wiki 18:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

text: For Evb-wiki, the answer is no.  The reason is that the other photo is revelant to the section and it gives the reader an idea of the error commited by the Pentagon since there are still other websites that still using the wrong photo. Tony the Marine 22:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: I was thinking that the two small sections "In memory" and "Awards and Recognitions" should be combined into a single more substantial sections. (Maybe simply "Awards and Recognitions.")   The subject matter of the sections are rather closely related, so it might be appropriate. Tony?--Evb-wiki 04:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In memory & Awards and Recognitions

message: I have removed the eyewitness account previously posted by a relative of a surviving soldier. Unfortunately, Wikipedia rules prohibit adding content that is not verifiable through a reliable source. Sandstein 07:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tony, you're using a document that you license as self-work (:Image:Press Release2.jpg) as a reference for your assertions.  Regardless of whether it was cleared by the family, this is clearly circular research.  I don't have any doubt that it's accurate, but this site is after verifiability not truth.  "Caesar's wife" and all that. - BanyanTree 07:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: That article is actually how I ended up here.  Since the Arizona Republic article covers the relevant info, I've used it as the reference for the sentence previously sourced to the press release. Cheers, BanyanTree 08:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eyewitness account removed 

message: March, 2007 - my father, William Kouts, was the soldier David M. Gonzales was digging out when he was shot and killed by sniper fire.  My Dad is 85 and in ill health and we want to get into contact with the Gonzales family before Dad's passing so that Dad can tell David Jr. of his father's heroics firsthand.Mbkouts 15:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: William Kouts