Talk:U.S. Senator calls for nationwide investigation into Army recruitment tactics

The article has been corrected and the tag is now unwarranted; but the tagger asked on my talk page that someone else other than him should review it and remove the tag. Paulrevere2005 22:58, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Where did my comments go?
I had comments describing what I felt was wrong with the article. Where are they now? - Amgine/talk 23:10, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Here they are, transcluded:

Cleanup

 * Title
 * Appears to say the US Military has been found guilty of fraud. Find a way to show it is reported or alleged, until guilt is determined by authorities.


 * The above comment is not accurate now Paulrevere2005 23:28, 13 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Image
 * I find no basis in the article as written to have the Marine logo. All or none, and might be better to have a "USA" logo instead of any one of the branches of military service.


 * Image is now gone. Paulrevere2005 12:06, 14 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Content
 * Appears primarily to report how others are covering the story, and not the story itself. Who is accused of fraud, when did it happen, where did it happen, why did it happen, and if possible how did it happen?
 * The above comment is not accurate now,please read the article.Paulrevere2005 23:28, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Answer these questions, please. - Amgine/talk 21:59, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Attention Amgine ! Administrator approved the story,
Dan100 advised the story is good now (see my talk page) Tag removed; Paulrevere2005 22:02, 14 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, Paulrevere2005, I read that yesterday. - Amgine/talk 16:21, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Tag removal time
Transfered from my talk page; "I rewrote the first paragraph, if you or someone else could take a look at it, I think it is almost ready to be published. Cspurrier 00:49, 14 May 2005 (UTC)"

I think the article is just fine now. Does anyone have any objections if I remove the tag? With the understanding anyone else can put it back? Paulrevere2005 12:05, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

added army image per Amgine's suggestion
Paulrevere2005 14:37, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

The scoop is that the 17 year old
The more interesting story is that the 17 year old got this story about practices, not that the army has fradulent recruiting practices. Wikinews benefits from having the edge on this.

Great point. check out [] Paulrevere2005 21:43, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

AP Style
Made some minor edits to accommodate AP style guidelines. - Tparlin 17:51, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Haven't checked your edits, but you should know that Wikinews follows its own style guide. - Amgine/talk 17:55, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

I also fixed some basic news writing problems (i.e. quotes should go on their own line, and should always have attribution). Tparlin 18:04, 15 May 2005 (UTC)