Talk:Chicago Project on Security and Threats

Review
I found the CPOST page to be intriguing but lacking in information. The sources all checked out but after further research there is more data to be added to the page. The overall mission and purpose would be a good start to draw readers in. --Ztwillard (talk) 05:15, 8 March 2017 (UTC)Ztwillard

Comments
You should really put more information about what the project is. You need sources on why this began, when it began, and so on. There is not very much information, any one searching for information can not get it from this page. You also mention the Suicide Terrorism Database, but you don't explain what it is or why it is important. There needs to be more sources and information. Why did you not quote directly from the website?Mistyroyall (talk) 18:58, 8 March 2017 (UTC)Mistyroyall (talk) 18:54, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

This needs more information about the program and also needs to reorganize the citations in the CSPOT and GTD section when Pape discusses the differences between their reports and the GTD's. Rmurph96 (talk) 01:54, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

==Within this section it would also be useful to denote the differences between the in definitions used to code the data in the GTD and the CPOST-SAD data. This would clarify some of the differences in the data. It also might be useful to discuss the different groups available. Savannt (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC) Even though there is a link to the SAD article within this article, it might make more sense to but merge the two articles as CPOST doesn't seem to have much of a purpose outside of housing the SAD database. Savannt (talk) 18:32, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

This article could use a more in-depth description. Also, under the "media" segment, there are a lot of links to other articles and not much information besides just listing them out and I find it kind of busy. I think it would be beneficial to quote some of the reports made by the media to give more of the media's perspective of the project and to give the section more substance. Also, the article seems to only reference Pape's work and his opinions. I would assume there has been other efforts from other sources that could be mentioned throughout the article. Kelmojo (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2017 (UTC)