Talk:Official Military Personnel File

External website promotion
I also would like to be clear that I am not trying to shamelessly promote 201file.com. The website was created as a way to inform service members of the most important benefits and entitlements, and to provide them resources to learn even more. Ashleyashumz (talk) Ashley @ 201file.com —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC).

I will be verifying that the content is indeed donated by 201file.com, as I am the owner and content writer of 201file.com. - I have verified the content information and removed the link to my site. My goal is simply to provide a resource for information on the 201 file for members of the military. I am a spouse of a service member and we have encountered many problems finding and retrieving parts of his 201 file, so I wanted to place some information on the web in various places linking to resources and providing information. I am open to people editing or changing the content appropriately to be more encyclopedic in nature, and I have no problem removing my site as a reference. The only reason I had my site URL on there before is because that is where the content came from, but it is ORIGINAL content, donated to Wikipedia by myself. Ashleyashumz (talk) 21:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Rename the article
I think we should rename the article because the term "201 file" is used in other contexts. For instance, in the Philippines, it is used in the context of employment where it is a file which shows an employees' history with a particular employer.

I suggest we call the existing article "201 File (US Military)." --112.201.32.153 (talk) 12:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

CIA 201 File Reference
The reference to the CIA's use of the 201 file is misleading in terms of how the CIA (more specifically the Directorate of Operations) actually uses such a number to reference their hard copy (folder-based) file system. I seriously doubt, however, you are going to find any definitive citations and suggest you simply delete the reference altogether. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.27.32 (talk) 16:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)