Template:Did you know nominations/Requirements Office

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by HalfGig talk 13:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Requirements Office

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the Requirements Office military supply effort was hidden within United States Agency for International Development's refugee relief program?

• ALT1:... that the Requirements Office military supply effort was disguised by the United States Agency for International Development's refugee relief program?
• ALT2:... that hiding the Requirements Office military supply effort within the United States Agency for International Development was controversial?
• ALT3:... that the Requirements Office replaced the Programs Evaluation Office in supplying a Secret War?
• Reviewed: Harald Jäger
• Comment: This secret organization with the innocuous name supplied the sinews of combat to American allies for over a decade during the Laotian Civil War. However, despite its best efforts, the Royal Lao Army never became an effective fighting force.Georgejdorner (talk) 18:02, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Created by Georgejdorner (talk). Self nominated at 18:02, 27 October 2014 (UTC).

• Don't see any signs of problems with the DYK suggest that a new version version of Alt 3 instead:
• ALT3:... that an innocuously named USAID organization, the Requirements Office, replaced, in 1962, the Programs Evaluation Office in supplying a Secret War?
• Sadads (talk) 01:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• ALT3.5 ... that in 1962 the innocuously named Requirements Office, replaced the Programs Evaluation Office in supplying the Secret War?
• A more graceful statement of ALT3+ that removes an inadvertent error. Believe me, USAID did not want to anything to do with disguising the RO; they had to be forced into it. As I recall, it's the only time in history that USAID delivered weaponry to anyone.Georgejdorner (talk) 04:03, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• I was hoping to have more links in, that I why added the USAID. If the USAID thing is untrue, then there needs to be some re-framing in the article to make sure that that difference is communicated (moreover, I added the USAID because the other alts implied that). Sadads (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• This review needs more details, in accordance with DYK review instructions. Details that are supposed to be checked in a review can be found at DYK Reviewing guide. BTW according to DYK rules, Sadads cannot approve his own hook. Yoninah (talk) 14:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: didn't realize I wasn't just merging the hooks above. Also, didn't realize that the instructions have changed so much since my last review. No wonder we have such a long backlog, Sadads (talk) 15:35, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• I've looked over the hooks above. Any of them will serve. Now can reviewers quit havering over hooks and target the text? Please?Georgejdorner (talk) 16:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

• This article is new enough and long enough. Although all the hooks are accurate, not all have inline citations (a DYK requirement) so I am striking all but the original hook and ALT1. The article is neutral but the sources are not online so I was unable to assess whether there was any close paraphrasing. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)