Talk:Presiding Officer (ARB)

Military history: North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

earlier draft[edit]

I had an earlier draft in my user space, which I temporarily pasted in here, and am now deleting... Geo Swan 13:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

responsible use of tags[edit]

A {{misleading}} tag, and several other questionable tags, were applied to this article. That tag, when instantiated, directs readers to the detailed explanation on the talk page.

The no doubt well meaning contributor who applied the misleading tag neglected to complete the process by leaving an explanation of what triggered their concern the article was misleading.

I will remove that tag after a reasonable period of time, if no explanation is supplied. Geo Swan (talk) 20:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"responsible use of tags" ?

"Responsible use of" is most frequently use in phrases like:

"Responsible use of drugs" - "Irresponsible use of drugs"

"Responsible use of fireworks" "Irresponsible use of fireworks"

"Responsible use of land mines" "Irresponsible use of land mines"

"Responsible Use of Gene Technology" "Irresponsible Use of Gene Technology"

"Responsible use of alcohol", Irresponsible use of alcohol"

"Responsible use of guns","Irresponsible use of guns"

I do not believe it is helpful nor necessary to start an discussion over responsible or irresponsible use of tags.

A friendly message like: "Could you pleas provide me with the rational for the {misleading} tag" would have done the job.

I hope you now understand my concerns and i would suggest you may avoid such wording in the future. Possible? IQinn (talk) 09:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

explanation for the misleading tag[edit]

Thank's for asking me about my rational for adding the {{misleading}} tag. Many of the reasons are already self explained by a brief look at the article and a look at the other tags and page history. Here is the summary.

The article is solely based on two primary sources closely affiliated with the subject.

No references that appear in reliable third-party publications.

Article is part of the highly controversial topic Guantanamo.

Main parts has been written by just one author.

The articles solely author has show a strong POV.

NPOV needs to be checked as it is solely base on United States government documents.

Some information in the article are not verified by the sources.

It is the large sum and combination of all these factors that make me believe that the tag is justified. No objection for removal after a substantial amount of these problems have been fixed. IQinn (talk) 09:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no real suggestion that anything in this article is actually in question. Unless and until that becomes the case these tags are spurious. Rich Farmbrough, 04:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]