	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2019 and 2 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Coldwargracie, Mcplanedude, JHLC8, Areyoucreative?, Leedlele, Cowboy1492. Peer reviewers: JHLC8.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

I dont know if it's permissable to use images from the F.A.S. Web Site without getting prior approval, but since, after a cursory search, I couldnt find any notification one way or the other, I foolishly went ahead and did it anyway. Oh well; mistakes can be corrected, and I remember reading somewhere that non-porfit and government organizations were subject to different regulations than others. I'm sure someone will yell at it if it becomes a big deal.

The image in question is the diagram I may or may not use on the article for the TOPOL-M missile I'm writing. Thanks. --Oceanhahn 08:57, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

FAS.org sources, as received by email from FAS[edit]

FAS.org sources, as received by email from FAS. ( bold emphasis mine ) Please note that images found on these source sites maybe still be under copyright. Be sure to read the disclaimers on these sites as well or contact the maintainer of those sites. DarkLordSeth 17:13, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As a policy, we do not allow the images on the FAS website to be reprinted. Although many of our images are in the public domain, others are copyrighted, and we simply do not have the staff resources to help other organizations sift through them to separate one from the other. However, I have included a list of the image banks which we have used for our site. I hope that they will be similarly helpful to you.

Satellite Images

Our recent satellite images were purchased from Space Imaging, Inc. ( http://www.spaceimaging.com ). Historical satellite images (CORONA, etc.) were obtained from the National Archives and are in the public domain.

General Military

http://www.defenselink.mil:80/multimedia/
http://www.hqmc.usmc.mil/factfile.nsf/AVE US Marine Corps Aircraft, Vehicles, and Equipment

Aircraft/USAF

http://www.af.mil/news/indexpages/fs_index.shtml Air Force Fact Sheets
http://www.af.mil/art/ Air Force Clipart
http://www.af.mil/art/3_insign/shields.htm Air Force Clipart - Insignia
http://www.acc.af.mil/imagebank/ Air Combat Command Imagebank
http://www.acc.af.mil/imagebank/links.htm Links to other Image Banks
http://www.aeroemblem.com/ aeroemblem.com - The Leader in Air Force Patches for the Collector
http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/44-80/preface.htm FM 44-80 VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION
http://147.71.210.21/fm4480/preface.htm M 44-80 VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION - Ft Bliss Illustrated Edition
http://www.kolibri.lr.tudelft.nl/eject/planes/pictures.htm EJECT! - The Aircraft Image Archives
http://www.baskerville.it/Flynet/GAVSTO/foto.html Aeromedia Aircraft Image Archive
http://www.rccad.com/Gallery.htm The largest gallery of VRML aircraft on the Internet! @ RcCad
http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/manatee/272/ AIRPLANE 3-VIEW DRAWINGS
http://www.totavia.com/gallery/ TOTAVIA Image Collections - Original Aviation Photography
http://www.achilles.net/~rjl/warplane.html The Warplane Picture Gallery by Richard J. Longchamp

Navy

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/ffiletop.html Navy Fact File
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/news/digital-imagery/in-news.html NAVSEA Digital Imagery
http://209.75.54.135/images/image.htm Fleet Imaging Command Pacific Website
http://flighttest.navair.navy.mil/Gallery/Gallerysearch.cfm Patuxent River Naval Air Station Photo Lab
http://www.bluejacket.com/ bluejacket.com - United States Navy, Marine Corps & Coast Guard History & Graphics
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/9697/ Navy Command Insignia Index

Land Warfare

http://www.saalt.army.mil/sard-zs/saal_zs_public_docs/wsh.html Army Weapon Systems Handbook
http://sill-www.army.mil/Graphics/clipart_library.htm ClipArt Library @ Ft. Sill
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/land/land00.hts Gary's Military Land Page
http://sorex.tvi.cc.nm.us/~rhernend/tanks.htm Armored Fighting Vehicles line art @ RENE'S HOT ARMOR

List of projects incomplete[edit]

Maybe we could add the other projects...--Beth Wellington 03:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to DarkLordSeth it's done. Expand as you will.--Beth Wellington 02:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Political Leanings?[edit]

Is FAS partisan? 24.17.32.26 18:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above point. Surely, even the most politically unreasonable would be inclined to agree that it is not possible to deal with many of the politically sensitive issues that the FAS does deal with without becoming politically embroiled and entwined with those issues.

This is certainly an issue that relies upon the requirement of knowing who determines how much the FAS gets paid. I'm going to see if I can put in a "Politics and Funding" section for the FAS to determine how transparent this organisation is with its funding.

Actually, the fact that this article on the FAS presents the FAS as non-partisan, ("Their first projects focused on controlling nuclear weapons and research on civilian nuclear power, issues that remain prominent to FAS today."), is the very reason I followed the link to the Talk page.

I think that the FAS serves a valid purpose. I'm glad to see that there is a Wikipedia article. I have been to FAS.org many times. I have had pleasant correspondences with Henry Kelly and a couple of others in reference to specifying soy-based foam for Third-World ThermaSave project. But they have always given me the impression that there overriding interest is in trying to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle with the idea that if they could somehow make the United States nuclear-free the rest of the world would abandon nuclear technology, terrorists would forswear nuclear weapons, and Humananity would magically enter into an Utopian Dreamtime of goodness and light.

I think that the sentence I quoted above should be rewritten in a way that does not imply the non-partisanship and agenda-ism that I see at the core of the FAS worldview. It is so close that it is difficult to suggest a specific edit other than perhaps it is the use of the world "controlling" that gives what I consider to be the wrong impression. I suggest replacing "controlling" with "restricting", "limiting", "eliminating" or something along those lines. If memory serves, the FAS was founded by scientists who opposed anything atomic or nuclear but were always more particularly critical of Western nuclear capability than others'.

The "Politics and Funding" section is an interesting proposal and the only logical place for any reference to the FAS's obvious historical preference for the Democratic Party and any allusion to the fact that one would have to be stupid to think that the Soviets and other enemies were so stupid as not aid and influence the FAS as a "dissident" group whose goals were compatible with their own. Unfortunately, recent history demonstrates to me that even an implied criticism of a political party will attract trolls and vandals like blood attracts sharks.

207.65.41.95 00:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC) James[reply]

I think FAS tries hard to be non-partisan and neutral but the fact is that it is a site run by American scientists so there is always a tendency to favor their policies. While the primary goal of Nuclear disarmament is not forgotten it gives an impression if there is any responsible nation in the world it is not France, not UK, not Russia but only America. But this is not at all unexpected and the transparency in their publications is visible to all.

(Adaptor40 (talk) 05:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Can't we just insert a note like this?

Political leanings: Reality-Based Community

And be done with it? Hcobb (talk) 21:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial vs. Encyclopedia[edit]

The FAS article as presented was an advertisement for FAS. FAS has a lot of knowledgable, respected members, and I visit their website frequently. They have a point of view, and are entitled to it. They are also entitled to have their point of view accurately reflected in Wikipedia. But the previous version of this article was an opinion piece which represented FAS' work as gospel. It is not. The article also did not acknowledge that there are other points of view.

I've edited it to correct some of those problems. It badly needs more impartial references and a discussion of some of the controversies. Without these changes, the article is not an encyclopedia article. 04:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Raryel

I suspect that that last IP edit was from their own offices... Hcobb (talk) 19:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plausible. ip2location.com lists the location of the IP address as Washington, D.C.; same as the headquarters of FAS. maxmind.com (usually more accurate than ip2location.com) lists it as Alexandria, Virginia; still within easy commuting distance. I'll leave it for someone else to decide if anything should be done. Wildbear (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Oelrich[edit]

Ivan Oelrich is used as a source for a lot of articles, but we don't have anything on him. Is he a big enough fish to mention here or does he get his own page? Hcobb (talk) 17:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Way too much detail in the Funding section...[edit]

The "Funding from the MacArthur Foundation" section reads more like an accounting report than an encyclopedia article. If another editor agrees, perhaps at least the first ten years of details can be summarized in a single bullet? Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host (talk) 01:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]