(April 4, 2008) Pentagon Computer Removes Mention of Dead Soldier's Sexual Orientation- abc

[Disfranchised]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/pentagon-comput.html#comments

The sexual orientation of Maj. Alan Rogers, the gay soldier killed in Iraq in January, continues to cause controversy.

The Washington Blade reports that someone deleted mention of Rogers being gay from his Wikipedia entry.

“Alan’s life was not about his sexual orientation but rather about the body of work he performed ministering to others and helping the defense of the country,” wrote whoever deleted the reference. “Quit trying to press an agenda that Alan wouldn’t have wanted made public just to suit your own ends.”

The Blade reports that "the IP address attached to the deletion of the details and the posted comments is 141.116.168.135. The address belongs to a computer from the office of the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence (G-2) at the Pentagon. The office is headed by Lt. Gen. John Kimmons, who was present at Rogers’ funeral and presented the flag from Rogers’ coffin to his cousin, Cathy Long."

The omission of Rogers' sexuality from his obituaries in the Washington Post and elsewhere has been a subject of debate.

- jpt

[MarkMiller]

Well this is understandable. It was not some bureaucrat who didn't know the man. It sounds like someone who knew him as well as his family. Also.....it is difficult for the subject of ones sexuality to be sourced correctly for wikipedia and as such is perfectly acceptable to be removed by anyone.

Any such claims must be backed up with clear published references. If this is possible than the information is still there in the archived versions of the article and can be returned. Continued deletion of sourced material will simply put the article In a protected Lock to keep nonmembers from editing and can even be locked from members.

I'm going to log on and look at the page.

[MarkMiller]

I went ot the article and the way the information is presented and sourced it does not belong there. A personal letter published at a communtiy magazine website is not a proper source for wikipedia. The letter is dated March 29, 2008. I removed the information again. If a published article from a reliable source can be found it is acceptable. Wikipedia has a reputation of publishing incorrect information with a lack of sources. I would not want my life published at Wikipedia without proper references either.

This is not a big deal but some people at wiki are involved in a big editing war and hopefully people will remember this is a man life we are writing about and not a recipe for cookies.

[MarkMiller]

One last thing on this subject. There are still references on the article to his sexuality. One is properly sourced and another has no source at all. I have left the unsourced amterial as the discussion on the talk page has agreed it is not needed due to the large amount of publicity....however i believe with so much pblicity there would be a good deal of pblished references to justify the mention.

This is why wiki is no longer seen as a reliable source.