Talk:Final Report of the Task Force on Combating Terrorist and Foreign Fighter Travel
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Ahrtoodeetoo in topic Primary sources
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Final Report of the Task Force on Combating Terrorist and Foreign Fighter Travel article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notable book. Per WP:NBOOK Criteria number one (1) and (5).
(1). The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. Namely, Georgetown Security Studies Review, and media reports about U.S. Congressional legislation directly motivated by the report.
(5). The book's author is so historically significant that any of the author's written works may be considered notable. Namely, the United States House Committee on Homeland Security.
Sagecandor (talk) 00:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Primary sources edit
Why are we removing tags without explanation? Am I mistaken that the article relies too heavily on primary sources? R2 (bleep) 17:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I checked but saw no explanation for the tag, here on the talk page. Sagecandor (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Isn't it self-explanatory? Almost all of the sources are appear to be primary sources or opinion sources. Surely there's been news coverage of the report that this article can be drawn from? R2 (bleep) 20:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- If you would like to help with any further research, that'd be most appreciated. Sagecandor (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- The user has notified Wikipedia editors by discussion here on this talk page. There is no need to maintain the tag on the article forever for the rest of our lifetimes. The tag will be removed absent any suggestions from the original poster about what sources they would like to add to the article. Sagecandor (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- Most of the entire article already relies upon secondary sources. These include: Georgetown Security Studies Review, Brookings Institution, Fox News, Time (magazine), The Hill (newspaper), Vanity Fair (magazine), San Francisco Chronicle, The Philadelphia Tribune, and Newsday. Sagecandor (talk) 18:56, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- The user has notified Wikipedia editors by discussion here on this talk page. There is no need to maintain the tag on the article forever for the rest of our lifetimes. The tag will be removed absent any suggestions from the original poster about what sources they would like to add to the article. Sagecandor (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- If you would like to help with any further research, that'd be most appreciated. Sagecandor (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Isn't it self-explanatory? Almost all of the sources are appear to be primary sources or opinion sources. Surely there's been news coverage of the report that this article can be drawn from? R2 (bleep) 20:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)