Talk:General Atomics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] NPOV

Does anyone else think this article may not be in compliance with the NPOV policy? Several accusations are mentioned (most notably "which the generals didn't want") that lack citations or any kind of substantiation. The only outside link is to a source that one could hardly consider credible mainstream media, so the article is (for all intensive purposes) lacking outside validation. In the interest of fairness and honesty, I will not edit this article myself beyond questioning its neutrality. I am an employee of General Atomics, so I can hardly claim to have a neutral point of view of my own. Kob zilla 04:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your not editing the article, and your disclosure of your status. I have changed the only section that I think you were referring to, citing a San Diego newspaper. I hope that it acceptable. John Broughton 13:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Time to block?

Anyone notice that it's the third time that 141.248.184.210 has deleted content critical of General Atomics?

Note that 141.248.184.210 is an IP owned by General Atomics: [1] 05:19, 5 July 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.214.86.10 (talk • contribs).

Nice job on editing the article, by the way.

As for blocking an IP address, my sense is that what's happened with this article is considered so low-level a degree of vandalism (only four times in the last year) that an automated approach is overkill. The article is on my watchlist, and I hope it's on yours, and it seems to be on other people's watchlist as well, and that seems to be enough right now, I believe. If someone were to attack the article several times a day, that would be different. John Broughton 12:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)