Talk:Project Shadowfire

Writing style
While the first two paragraphs of this article are written with an encyclopedic tone, the third and fourth paragraphs seem to be written in news style or quotes from a media release. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and news style should not be used. Surely the third and fourth paragraphs can be rephrased to present the beliefs of the Homeland Security and ICE personnel as encyclopedic statements. Part of the problem is that quote attributed to the Director of ICE in the media release is now attributed to the former Director in the Wikipedia article. While that may now be true, it wasn't at the time. This is misleading and misrepresents the quotation, because it sounds like it is coming from someone knowledgeable about ICE but who is no longer part of the ICE organisation, when the statement is coming directly from the ICE leadership. As a result the attribution of the quotation fails verification because the then Director made the statement, rather than a now former Director. While one could replace the word "Former" with "Then", that doesn't fix the underlying style issue. I think it would be better if both quotations were replaced with paraphrases of what the quotations are saying. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 10:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I edited that so that instead of having actual quotations inside, it's been rephrased to mention statements as aligned with what you mentioned in your last line. Could you verify that the tone is more apt now? Intuivo (talk) 10:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)