![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
I added the merge tag. Any comments? Concerns? -- Blind Eagle talk~ contribs 17:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
-I like this recommendation but I do not want to be a registered user of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.129.199 ( talk) 00:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
There are only two sentences, and they contradict each other. Someone fix it, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.231.252 ( talk) 04:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
This material definitely does not require a separate article. TexasRazor ( talk) 20:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
The article states that for an individual to receive Yankee White clearance (to work with the president) that they must "not be or have been married to a person of foreign descent". However, Dana Perino, the current White House Press Secretary, is married to Peter McMahon who is from the UK. How does that work? -- Thorwald ( talk) 02:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The article is false about the marriage relations of a person undergoing a Yankee White Clearance. It is best to say that it is unlikely that a person who has marriage relations to one of foreign decent to pass clearance, so I have read in a book. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.62.142.125 (
talk)
09:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
A person who is being considered for Yankee White clearance has to "not be ... of foreign descent," but then technically no one is of purely American descent further back than about 450 years, unless they are of Native American descent, and even there there is likely some point where no person can date lineage purely back to America. (Yes, I'm half-joking here.)
But to be serious:
The great majority of Americans can probably only trace American descendancy back about 100 to 200 years, if even that far back. Many, only a few generations within the last century. How far back would the government actually look to satisfy this condition? -- Nyadav ( talk) 23:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
One sentence says "Yankee White is a security clearance given in the United States for personnel working with the President." Another sentence says "Contrary to popular lore, the Yankee White clearance given to personnel who work directly with the President is not a classification, but rather a type of background check." It seems to me that a clearance is not the same thing as a background check. A background check may or may not lead to a clearance. Therefore, it looks like we should remove the claim that the Yankee White is a type of background check. 71.178.104.51 ( talk) 06:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
May I partially concur with the above point asking whether "Yankee White" is an investigation type or a clearance. It is possible for both the investigation and the clearance to have the same name, I suppose, but in my past experience, this has not been the case. Some clearances, particularly those bearing codeword designations, are classified. In such cases, a more generic, unclassified pseudonym is devised to represent these types of clearances whenever these need to be discussed in areas/circumstances unsuitable for classified discussions. Therefore, although I have no recent/current knowledge of the Yankee White investigation or clearance, I agree that this question should be resolved and a clearer distinction be made between the name of the investigative category/process and the name of the clearance. TonyRony ( talk) 00:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
(disclaimer: this is not a troll) I'm curious as to whether the current president would actually be eligable for a Yankee-white classification himself, having grown up in a foreign country. Whitehatnetizen ( talk) 14:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Is that really needed in this article? If it is, it should be changed to show another example of where Yankee White is required. Jac roe Blank 00:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
no action for 2 years, deleting this section about a completely unrelated topic. DavesPlanet ( talk) 13:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Its quite a racist term, no mention of it?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.63.158.219 ( talk) 12:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
So how does Yankee White compare to the "nicknames" used other typical security clearances? If this isn't racist you would assume they are called "Tago Victor" and such, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.25.172.203 ( talk) 05:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the now-unsupported assertion
Contrary to popular lore, the Yankee White clearance given to personnel who work directly with the President is not a classification, but rather a type of background check.
from the article. I did a bit of googling, and turned up the following:
There are no doubt a lot of sources out there which I have not looked at. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I've reverted this edit which, in my personal opinion, is probably meritorious. My guess is that the removed assertion is factually incorrect, but it is supported -- and see WP:V and WP:DUE. Perhaps a WP:RS argument can be made, or perhaps this is a case where WP:IAR applies. In the event that my reversion is reverted, I don't intend to argue this further. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I removed "Protection Personnel of the United States Secret Service" from category one personnel.
1) This is not listed in the source from which this information is taken (see page six on http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/521087p.pdf).
2) Yankee White is a Department of Defense background check used on DoD employees and contractors. It has nothing to do with the United States Secret Service, a law enforcement agency under another executive department. Likewise, other presidential personnel like his personal secretary, political staff, etc. do not go through a Yankee White background check if they have no DoD affiliation.
US Secret Service conducts its own in-depth background checks that lead to its own Top Secret clearance, and the FBI performs background investigations on other presidential support staff: "High level Presidential appointees, cabinet officers, agency heads and staff who may work at the White House directly for the President" ( http://www.opm.gov/products_and_services/investigations/faqs.asp).
-- User:kevin23
This is a discussion of a WP:BRD revert of a WP:BOLD change in the article lead in this edit.
The reverted edit would have added the following material ahead of the current opening paragraph of the lead. It is unsupported, appears not to introduce supported content currently present in the article body. If this material is supportabe, its addition to the article in some form might be useful.
References
Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
I added the merge tag. Any comments? Concerns? -- Blind Eagle talk~ contribs 17:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
-I like this recommendation but I do not want to be a registered user of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.129.199 ( talk) 00:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
There are only two sentences, and they contradict each other. Someone fix it, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.231.252 ( talk) 04:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
This material definitely does not require a separate article. TexasRazor ( talk) 20:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
The article states that for an individual to receive Yankee White clearance (to work with the president) that they must "not be or have been married to a person of foreign descent". However, Dana Perino, the current White House Press Secretary, is married to Peter McMahon who is from the UK. How does that work? -- Thorwald ( talk) 02:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The article is false about the marriage relations of a person undergoing a Yankee White Clearance. It is best to say that it is unlikely that a person who has marriage relations to one of foreign decent to pass clearance, so I have read in a book. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.62.142.125 (
talk)
09:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
A person who is being considered for Yankee White clearance has to "not be ... of foreign descent," but then technically no one is of purely American descent further back than about 450 years, unless they are of Native American descent, and even there there is likely some point where no person can date lineage purely back to America. (Yes, I'm half-joking here.)
But to be serious:
The great majority of Americans can probably only trace American descendancy back about 100 to 200 years, if even that far back. Many, only a few generations within the last century. How far back would the government actually look to satisfy this condition? -- Nyadav ( talk) 23:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
One sentence says "Yankee White is a security clearance given in the United States for personnel working with the President." Another sentence says "Contrary to popular lore, the Yankee White clearance given to personnel who work directly with the President is not a classification, but rather a type of background check." It seems to me that a clearance is not the same thing as a background check. A background check may or may not lead to a clearance. Therefore, it looks like we should remove the claim that the Yankee White is a type of background check. 71.178.104.51 ( talk) 06:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
May I partially concur with the above point asking whether "Yankee White" is an investigation type or a clearance. It is possible for both the investigation and the clearance to have the same name, I suppose, but in my past experience, this has not been the case. Some clearances, particularly those bearing codeword designations, are classified. In such cases, a more generic, unclassified pseudonym is devised to represent these types of clearances whenever these need to be discussed in areas/circumstances unsuitable for classified discussions. Therefore, although I have no recent/current knowledge of the Yankee White investigation or clearance, I agree that this question should be resolved and a clearer distinction be made between the name of the investigative category/process and the name of the clearance. TonyRony ( talk) 00:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
(disclaimer: this is not a troll) I'm curious as to whether the current president would actually be eligable for a Yankee-white classification himself, having grown up in a foreign country. Whitehatnetizen ( talk) 14:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Is that really needed in this article? If it is, it should be changed to show another example of where Yankee White is required. Jac roe Blank 00:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
no action for 2 years, deleting this section about a completely unrelated topic. DavesPlanet ( talk) 13:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Its quite a racist term, no mention of it?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.63.158.219 ( talk) 12:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
So how does Yankee White compare to the "nicknames" used other typical security clearances? If this isn't racist you would assume they are called "Tago Victor" and such, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.25.172.203 ( talk) 05:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the now-unsupported assertion
Contrary to popular lore, the Yankee White clearance given to personnel who work directly with the President is not a classification, but rather a type of background check.
from the article. I did a bit of googling, and turned up the following:
There are no doubt a lot of sources out there which I have not looked at. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I've reverted this edit which, in my personal opinion, is probably meritorious. My guess is that the removed assertion is factually incorrect, but it is supported -- and see WP:V and WP:DUE. Perhaps a WP:RS argument can be made, or perhaps this is a case where WP:IAR applies. In the event that my reversion is reverted, I don't intend to argue this further. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I removed "Protection Personnel of the United States Secret Service" from category one personnel.
1) This is not listed in the source from which this information is taken (see page six on http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/521087p.pdf).
2) Yankee White is a Department of Defense background check used on DoD employees and contractors. It has nothing to do with the United States Secret Service, a law enforcement agency under another executive department. Likewise, other presidential personnel like his personal secretary, political staff, etc. do not go through a Yankee White background check if they have no DoD affiliation.
US Secret Service conducts its own in-depth background checks that lead to its own Top Secret clearance, and the FBI performs background investigations on other presidential support staff: "High level Presidential appointees, cabinet officers, agency heads and staff who may work at the White House directly for the President" ( http://www.opm.gov/products_and_services/investigations/faqs.asp).
-- User:kevin23
This is a discussion of a WP:BRD revert of a WP:BOLD change in the article lead in this edit.
The reverted edit would have added the following material ahead of the current opening paragraph of the lead. It is unsupported, appears not to introduce supported content currently present in the article body. If this material is supportabe, its addition to the article in some form might be useful.
References
Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)