User talk:Frank Freeman

AfD nomination of A Strategic Analyst On 9/11

A Strategic Analyst On 9/11, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that A Strategic Analyst On 9/11 satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Strategic Analyst On 9/11 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of A Strategic Analyst On 9/11 during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kateshort forbob 12:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my haste reading the article, I mistakenly believed it was promoting a 9/11 conspiracy theory and said as much in my comment. That comment is gone, but I apologize for the mistake. Gazpacho 21:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CIA main and subordinate articles

Thanks for the link for the anti-Soviet source. You may not have been involved at the time late last year, but several of us (including the Intelligence Task Force at the Military History Project) are trying to reduce the size of the main CIA article, by moving country- and topic-specific material to separate sub-articles. If you look at the bottom of the CIA page and expand the first entry, you'll see the established article. Soviet activities in Afghanistan have been going into the regional article containing Afghanistan, rather than the Russian article.

Thanks! Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 14:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if you want to add material, please add it to one of the subordinate articles, not the main CIA article. There is a fairly wide consensus that the size of the main CIA article needs to be reduced, without losing information that is well sourced. This can be done by putting the text in the sub-articles identified in the navigation box at the bottom of the page.

If you disagree with this statement of consensus, please discuss it at the CIA talk page. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 15:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moves to CIA transnational anti-terrorism activities

I moved your material to CIA transnational anti-terrorism activities, deleting no content, but breaking out by date so it can merge. Please try to work with several of us in getting the detailed material off the main CIA page. You have good content there, and there is good content in the sub-article. Please work with us, and not get into a revert war. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 10:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Summaries on main page

I fully agree with the idea of having summaries, with the details wikilinked. Perhaps the only thing that is not clear between us is the definition of "topic". For example, the basic blowback problem, the CTC, the Bin Laden virtual station are all legitimate topics, but I'd hate, for space reasons, to have more than a couple of sentences on each on the main page. The topics can, of course, have Topic # Subtopic links to the transnational and possibly country articles.

You have good material that enriches the content of the transnational terrorism article. I didn't delete any of your content that I moved; I only broke it up to fit the chronology. You'll see that I marked your material with temporary headings -- either of us can do merges.

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 11:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The CIA, al-Qaeda, and the "war on terror"

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The CIA, al-Qaeda, and the "war on terror", suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ravenswing 17:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be interested to hear *specific details* of why you have proposed it for deletion. Frank Freeman (talk) 08:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The CIA, al-Qaeda, and the "war on terror"

I have nominated The CIA, al-Qaeda, and the "war on terror", an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The CIA, al-Qaeda, and the "war on terror". Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Ravenswing 12:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to September 11 attacks

To avoid discretionary sanctions, you should refrain from posting material to the article page without first discussing on the article Talk pag and obtaining consensus for your edit. This is not a judgment on you, your views, or the material you wish to add. This article has suffered prolonged disruption in the past and any admin action I take will be with the aim of preventing further disruption. If you have further questions, post on my Talk page or Talk:September 11 attacks. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 12:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ctc article

nice work.Decora (talk) 16:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strategic Assessments Branch article and material

I am going to propose the article Strategic Assessments Branch for deletion via WP:AfD under WP:NOTE. This will also apply to the same material used on a couple articles, especially Bin Laden Issue Station. Hope you will participate in the AfD if you are still active. Mnnlaxer (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]