Jump to content

Talk:International Institute for Counter-Terrorism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:17, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


International Policy Institute for Counter-TerrorismInternational Institute for Counter-Terrorism — The existing page name, is not what the subject says on its website, nor in its initials, and it does not comply with the results of a preponderance-based Google search, which favors the requested move. It apparently uses both, but the page and its re-direct should be switched. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 05:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Material cited to Eliot A. Cohen in Foreign Affairs deleted from the lead

[edit]

Eliot A. Cohen ("Eliot A. Cohen (born April 3, 1956) is the Robert E. Osgood Professor of Strategic Studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at the Johns Hopkins University. Cohen is the Director of the Strategic Studies Program at SAIS and has specialized in the Middle East, Persian Gulf, Iraq, arms control, and NATO. He is a member of the Project for the New American Century and "is one of the few teachers in the American academy to treat military history as a serious field" according to International Law scholar Ruth Wedgwood.[1] He served as Counselor to the United States Department of State under Secretary Condoleezza Rice from 2007 to 2009") is most certainly an expert on the topic. Writing in Foreign Affairs, the premier US establishment foreign affairs journal, he discussed the topic. He can certainly be used as an RS on the topic, his comments are certainly due for the lead given his qualifications and the pretige of the journal in which the material is published.

What is more the article is almost entirely sourced to the the organisations self published material making the deletion of what is a gold standard source for this topic even more egregious. Dlv999 (talk) 17:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]