Talk:Charles Bolden/Archive 1

Archive 1

NPOV

Bolden's tenure as NASA administrator has been highly controversial, but there's no indication of this in this article. THF (talk) 11:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Can you explain a little further? I haven't heard about anything at all, but then, I don't normally look for NASA-related news. bahamut0013^words_deeds 13:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

THF is probably referring to the fact that he's in the news for making some comments about reaching out to the Muslim world. Nothing to see here, a minor bit of news, not worth a mention -- certainly not justifying a POV tag. I'm removing it unless this can be justified. TJRC (talk) 16:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like the usual political drivel. Unless it actually comes to something significant, I don't see why it warrants inclusion. bahamut0013^words_deeds 22:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

It's notable that the previous head of NASA has criticized the current head of NASA for making this comment, especially in that the previous head says the statement of the current head is contrary to NASA's officially stated goals.

In a June 2010 interview with Arab news outlet Al Jazeera, Bolden said that his three major goals as Administrator was to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, to expand NASA's international relationships, and to reach out to and engage the Muslim world. Regarding the third goal of Bolden's comment, Michael Griffin, who had headed NASA for four years before Obama's presidency, said "NASA was chartered by the 1958 Space Act to develop the arts and sciences of flight in the atmosphere and in space and to go where those technologies will allow us to go... That’s what NASA does for the country. It is a perversion of NASA’s purpose to conduct activities in order to make the Muslim world feel good about its contributions to science and mathematics."

Little runt sitting there on a log (talk) 13:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:DUCK, I'm pretty sure that Little Runt is yet another argyle avatar of the banned User:Grundle2600. PhGustaf (talk) 16:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Sock or not, I don't think that his point has a leg to stand on. Of course Bolden's going to tell an Arab media outlet he wants to make an outreach to thier viewers, and of course there is going to be somebody to criticize it. It seems like a moot point when you consider WP:NOTNEWS and how typical this kind of banter is with the current administration. bahamut0013^words_deeds 20:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Every policy and guideline I can think of militates against covering this here. WP:NOTNEWS, while intended as a notability guideline is informative that we shouldn't treat an article as a news source. WP:COATRACK warns against adding stuff just to deal with this side issue of this darned Muslim-lovin' president. WP:BLP cautions in particular of the dangers of introducing POV material into the biography of a living person. WP:UNDUE precludes devoting the majority of a section of an article to an artificial controversy stirred up by a pseudo-news company trying to appease its viewers and add eyeballs. WP:RECENT warns not to give emphasis to something just because it's recent.

Why would we want to cover this in an encyclopedia? TJRC (talk) 20:58, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

An NPOV tag indicates the existence of a NPOV dispute. Please don't remove an appropriately placed tag. See WP:TAGGING and WP:NPOVD. There is nothing in this article about Bolden's disastrous tenure as NASA chief, which has been controversial long before he indicated that he was abandoning NASA's long-standing mission. THF (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm removing the tag again. If you have any specific proposals please feel free to mention and we can discuss here. Tags are used short-term to indicate for the benefit of readers that there is a bona-fide NPOV issue that the editors are so far unable to resolve. They're not tools of the dispute. I cannot fathom that failure to include disparaging information like this reflects a bona fide neutrality dispute. - Wikidemon (talk) 21:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm re-removing this. From the pages you cite: "Any editor who sees a tag, but does not see any problem with the article, and who does not see any detailed complaint on the talk page, may remove the tag." See WP:TAGGING. "Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies." See WP:NPOVD. Nonspecific complaints like "Bolden's disastrous tenure as NASA chief" does not meet these criteria.

If you'd like to address your perception of a POV issue, provide constructive suggestions for improvements. We're not just going to leave a tag up there if there is no discussion of improvement. TJRC (talk) 21:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I've asked you to elaborate, and you've posted heresince without elaborating on exactly what you think the issue is. One person being unhappy and a trolling sock does not a dispute make. bahamut0013^words_deeds 21:52, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Note: there is more discussion related to this "controversy" at Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama#NASA. bahamut0013^words_deeds 21:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Gap in his career: 2004 -- 2009

The article currently makes no mention of what Bolden did between his 2004 USMC retirement and his 2009 appointment as NASA administrator. Also, is it appropriate to say that he was a, "... member of the NASA Astronaut Corps until 1994 when he returned to active duty in the Marine Corps ..."? Wouldn't he have been an active duty marine during his time at NASA. -- 124.157.218.5 (talk) 07:19, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Omitted Houston From Receiving a Retired Shuttle

His decision to omit Houston from the list of cities receiving a retired space shuttle angered many in that city, home of the Johnson Space Center, and created a controversy that grows with time. This would be relevant to section 3.2, Administrator of NASA, since he apparently played a significant role in deciding which cities would get a shuttle and the controversy surrounding that decision. Ted Oberg, ABC (KTRK), 9/5/11, cite: http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8342577Jiminykrick (talk) 03:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)jiminykrick

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 12:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

---

Charles F. Bolden, Jr. → Charles Bolden – Common name. [1] [2] [3] Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support the longer version is not needed for disambiguation so we better stick to the common name Hekerui (talk) 16:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello sir I am an Iranian and a young boy. space is my favorite subject Theory about the age of stars : when the first rays of light begins to come to our side shows that this star is made that moment and when the light of star reaches Earth we see it and that moment our distance from that star is equivalent with that star's age because of light's speed. I am Ali Gholami Email=<redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.140.114.254 (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)