Talk:Targeted Killing in International Law/Archive 1

Update
This article had a GA Review, and was successfully promoted to WP:GA quality status. The review is at Talk:Targeted Killing in International Law/GA1. -- Cirt (talk) 00:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Redirect?/ rename?
Shouldn't Targeted Killing in International Law link primarlly to Targeted killing, or a disambiguation page rather than to this article about a book?93.96.148.42 (talk) 11:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * What? You mean do away with this entire article? Why? -- Cirt (talk) 15:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I assume that the IP means renaming this article "Targeted Killing in International Law (book)", redirecting "Targeted Killing in International Law" to "Targeted killing" and adding a hatnote to "Targeted killing" to point to the book here. Overcomplicated and unnecessary.  Anyone who wants to know about targeted killing in international law will either find it through the search page (which brings up "targeted killing" before this page) or through the first sentence of the article.  BencherliteTalk 15:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree with this comment by . -- Cirt (talk) 15:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors
I've put in a request for this article to be copy-edited, by WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:35, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Copyedit
Per request, edited this. Feedback encouraged! Comments:


 * Left a couple of requests for clarification as comments in the text.


 * In the reception section, there is no need to individually footnote each quote, unless the note identifies the location of the quote within the work. I removed the duplicates.


 * Assuming the book documented the increased acceptability of TK, it would be helpful to briefly cite such evidence in the article.


 * It would be helpful to note the sales of the work.


 * The description implies that only "the West" is covered in the book. E.g., does the book address the TK by the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War or in other areas?


 * Did the book reach conclusions about the legality and morality of the practice? I found no clear statement in the text.

Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 18:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! I'll look through this in depth and work to address the helpful points raised. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)