Talk:Pakistani Security Forces: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Martin Wyatt (article needs updating or deletion) |
imported>George Swan |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Out of date == | == Out of date == | ||
This article is very out of date. If it cannot be updated, I think it ought to be deleted or put into cold storage. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 20:39, 15 August 2013 (UTC) | This article is very out of date. If it cannot be updated, I think it ought to be deleted or put into cold storage. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 20:39, 15 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
: [[User:Howard Berkowitz]] wrote this article. At that time he was the sole editor for Military History. He is/was a good writer, good researcher. Using hindsight I think many people think it was a mistake to make him an editor for an unprecedented five fields. Some people, including myself, question whether he was tempermentally suited for a role that required tact, graciousness, patience. Other people think that being a brilliant polymath was not a sufficient substitute for formal credentials. | |||
: Nevertheless, I don't see anything terribly out of date here, or anything that seemed problematic from a bias point of view. | |||
: May I ask, if you think there are problematic passages, paragraphs, sections, whether we couldn't just trim those paragraphs? Maybe making sure the article is uptodate could be accomplished simply by trimming those paragraphs with time-based assertions? | |||
: Anyhow, do you have time to indicate what portions you thing are out of date? [[User:George Swan|George Swan]] 18:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:36, 16 August 2013
Out of date
This article is very out of date. If it cannot be updated, I think it ought to be deleted or put into cold storage. --Martin Wyatt 20:39, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- User:Howard Berkowitz wrote this article. At that time he was the sole editor for Military History. He is/was a good writer, good researcher. Using hindsight I think many people think it was a mistake to make him an editor for an unprecedented five fields. Some people, including myself, question whether he was tempermentally suited for a role that required tact, graciousness, patience. Other people think that being a brilliant polymath was not a sufficient substitute for formal credentials.
- Nevertheless, I don't see anything terribly out of date here, or anything that seemed problematic from a bias point of view.
- May I ask, if you think there are problematic passages, paragraphs, sections, whether we couldn't just trim those paragraphs? Maybe making sure the article is uptodate could be accomplished simply by trimming those paragraphs with time-based assertions?
- Anyhow, do you have time to indicate what portions you thing are out of date? George Swan 18:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)