This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Ok @ Springee:, whats your beef with this? It seem to me that this page should have summaries of all major investigations by the IG and the fact that it currently does not isnt really a good enough argument for removing *all* of the information. Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 18:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This article is a factual article about the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Transportation. Prior to the addition here [ [9]] it was clear the article was a simple description of the founding of the office, it's rolls and responsibilities etc. It is totally undue to then make over half the section in investigations about one, recent investigation with limited sourcing. It would be better to have a section in the article pointing to discussions of investigations as they come up in other articles. If we are to expand this article to include investigations then we should have some suggestion for how and when to include. Certainly it should be more than a paragraph that lists accusations but no conclusions. That looks like an attempt to smear "the other side". Springee ( talk) 18:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Ok @ Springee:, whats your beef with this? It seem to me that this page should have summaries of all major investigations by the IG and the fact that it currently does not isnt really a good enough argument for removing *all* of the information. Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 18:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This article is a factual article about the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Transportation. Prior to the addition here [ [9]] it was clear the article was a simple description of the founding of the office, it's rolls and responsibilities etc. It is totally undue to then make over half the section in investigations about one, recent investigation with limited sourcing. It would be better to have a section in the article pointing to discussions of investigations as they come up in other articles. If we are to expand this article to include investigations then we should have some suggestion for how and when to include. Certainly it should be more than a paragraph that lists accusations but no conclusions. That looks like an attempt to smear "the other side". Springee ( talk) 18:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)