Talk:Freedom of Information Act (United States)
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Freedom of Information Act (United States) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2|
|While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see .|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Can a non-citizen make a FOIA request, either from the US or overseas?
126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Where is John Moss?
It is a huge oversight that John Moss http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Moss is nowhere mentioned on this page. Lyndon Johnson is noted as signing this into law, but he was opposed to FOII.
Can someone more capable than myself try to fix this? background: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB194/index.htm, http://www.johnemossfoundation.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:36, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
- I am going to edit the page to reflect the fact that President Johnson opposed the bill, as confirmed by George Washington University's National Security Archive.0nullbinary0 (talk) 02:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Rewording of the Background section
The second sentence in the background section previously read, "However, the sensitivity of some government information and private interests clashes with this view." I feel this sentence was inelegant and confusing and I attempted to replace it with something more straightforward. I'm not a specialist in the subject, so I was careful not to change the meaning of the sentence. However, if I did so inadvertently, please improve it instead of reverting it. I also know that the sentence is still not ideal as it refers to 'others', but I felt this was allowable as the previous sentence made reference to 'some'. Perhaps there is a way to rewrite both sentences that makes clear the conflict without referring to nameless parties. Bendykst (talk) 02:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Further, the first sentence of the third paragraph currently reads "However, it is in the exemptions to solicitation of information under these acts that problems and discrepancies arise". It is a very unwieldy sentence to read and process. I suggest changes, but am not familiar.184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)