Talk:National Communications System

Military history: National / North America / United States C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

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

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

Article tagged

I put up Wikify and Neutrality tags because I'm not sure what other tags to use. This article is taken without attribution from one of its sources. http://tesp.ncs.gov/library/reports/ncs_fy2003.pdf This is an NCS document about itself. However, this is not a copyright violation because it is an original U.S. government work. I had an analogous concern about Counterfeit Deterrence System (now deleted as copyright violation); the article there was written by an association of non-U.S. governments (hence probably copyrightable) about their work and in my view suspect as to POV. When government agencies write about their own work, they tend to present it as necessary, desirable, a good use of money, respectful of civil liberties, more efficient than the private sector, properly independent of other bureaucracies, etc. If Wikipedia uses those descriptions, the source should at least be noted, shouldn't it? Schoen 23:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- You have a good point. I will say though that the article that was written by NCS about themselves is a fairly good overview of the subject. I would suggest a "need of an expert" tag instead. That way, someone with experience could look over to add their own input. KB3JUV 21:07, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article readability

This article does not scan well at all. [posted by Anon]
- Should now be improved, see changes below.--Wikiwriter706 20:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Complete rewrite

I modified this article with content from the NCS website, wikified and edited. All of this is public domain and encyclopedic style with npov. I completely deleted the previous article, which was copied and pasted from a law, I think. It still needs some rework by an expert, I think, and can be expanded somewhat.--Wikiwriter706 20:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good Thanks for your work--KB3JUV