Talk:Brookings Report
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Space. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
 |
This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
Since the "Wikify" and "Cleanup" tags are still up, I assume that there is still some work to be done on this article. If someone with more experience can give me a few hints on what needs to be done, I'd be glad to do it. I don't currently see any problems with the current article.
Having said that, the article does not really address the entire Brookings report entitled “Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs”, but primarily the small section regarding ET Aliens.
Even given that out of all the reports submitted by the Brookings Institute, this appears to be the only one referred to as “The Brookings Report”, and even given that the only section usually discussed by space enthusiasts is the section regarding interaction with ET Aliens, the question is: Is is appropriate to have a Wikipedia article on that report addressing only that limited section?Mentalavenger 22:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps rather than "Cleanup", the "Expand" tag would be more appropriate? Also, there are some sentences that are difficult to follow and may benefit from re-writing.--Jmartinky 03:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Cleaned up a bit, added a sources section and removed wikify tag.Akradecki 20:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bad link
The link to the PDF of the full report doesn't work anymore. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chill Mike D (talk • contribs) 14:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC).
