Talk:David Brant (law enforcement)

To do. Please write a brief definition or description of this article at David Brant (law enforcement)/Definition.

Metadata here

Provenance

	NOTICE, please do not remove from top of page.
	I released this article to the Wikipedia article David Brant, under the Wikipedia username Geo Swan.
	I started this article in 2007. I made a large addition to it in 2020. All the material I ported here was material I wrote myself.
	Check the history of edits to see who inserted this notice.

• 2007
• 2020

Good start with renaming, but more is needed to make this article a keeper

1. NAMING: "David Brant (law enforcement)" is better than "David Brant", but it's still possible that there might be other people across the English-speaking world with that name in "law enforcement". Better might be "David Brant (U.S. NCIS Director)". Lest this seem unreasonable, let me state that when I worked at AT&T in the 1980's (which employed 330,000 people at the time), there were at least five employees of AT&T named "Pat Palmer" in that one company alone. There are probably dozens of people alive today with a name identical to mine, possibly even in the state where I live.
2. INTRO: Revising the intro to state clearly, within the first 35 words, why this person is important (and, being Director of NCIS is not necessarily enough). This article should start with something like "David Brant was director of the U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) from 1997 to 2005 and is memorable for arguing up his chain of command that Navy personnel should not be involved with torture (after having heard from the grapevine of possible abuses going on at Guantanamo Bay, which the Navy ran)." as the very first sentence of the article.
3. LINKS TO: There should be links from other articles to this one, for example on the Related Articles tab for Guantanamo Bay and NCIS (and maybe the U.S. Navy), at a bare minimum.

While these specific criteria for articles of living persons have not been written down before this, they are in large part common sense. Wikipedia is not a good example; it's Notability policy allows a lot of articles about people to be created merely because their names got into newspapers (i.e., mass shooters) and excludes many deserving people whose actions are noteworthy but they never sought the limelight. WP has terrible introductions to articles; the readers are forced to wade through a swamp of detritus, in many cases, before stumbling upon the more important points about the person. And not cross-linking one's newly created article with existing articles is just laziness. How can one expect the article ever to be found without any cross-links? Pat Palmer (talk) 20:11, 19 February 2024 (CST)