Talk:U.S. Council on Competitiveness

Where are these controversies?
This text says that the page is "neutral". Where, then, are the references to the Council's pivotal role in ensuring that GMOs (genetically modified organisms) may be marketed directly to the public without informative labeling? What about the council's interest in the Korean memory dumping issue during Dan Quayle's tenure as its leader? This piece doesn't even explain how the "President's Council on Competitiveness" somehow transmogrified from a quasi-governmental agency dedicated to subverting the Clean Air act into a modern non-profit think-tank.

Copyright
I've removed portions of text which clearly appear to be directly copied from the www.compete.org website. That website shows a copyright notice, which means that their content cannot be freely copied and released under the GFDL license for contributions to this site. Franamax (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * update: Since the infringing material has been reposted without proof of permission, it has been tagged and reported per WP:COPYVIO. • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Copyright
I am an intern at the Council on Competitiveness, and I (geasterb) have received expressed consent to copy all of the Initiative information (as you would expect). While I don't know anything about the "Gfdl" licensing laws, I can guarantee you that I have the consent of the council.

On a separate note, I ask that anybody take a look at this article and examine its neutrality. I tried to make sure it is completely neutral, but if anybody finds anything that is questionable, please post it here.

If anybody knows the formal GFDL process I can go through for additional verifcation, that would be great too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geasterb (talk • contribs) 17:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, first Geasterb, please sign your talk page posts by adding four tildes ~ . Also it's best to reply at the specific thread, indenting your post with colons, and if you make a new section on a talk page, we prefer to see it placed at the end of the page. All these things help everyone keep the conversation straight. I'll drop a welcome message at your own talk page if you don't already have one, ideally you'll read through the tips there.
 * Now, as to what you are trying to do: it seems as though you've been told to write a Wikipedia article on your organization, which is fine - but the first thing you should do is read our conflict-of-interest guidelines. You should also carefully read about GFDL, it means that everything you add here can be re-used by anyone, for whatever they feel like using it for, and your organization will never have control over that re-use, no matter what. If they truly do wish to release that content to the public, they need to say so right on their site, otherwise you are violating copyright by publishing it here under GFDL. We don't allow straight copies from websites.
 * As to you doing this personally, two things: 1) You say that you have express consent, but how are we to know that's true? No offence intended, but you can't just claim that, you need written backup; 2) When you make an edit here you are claiming your personal ownership of that text, and your personal right to release that text into the public domain - so did you, yourself, personally write what's on the org website? Can you prove it? Do you have the exclusive copyright?
 * This may seem quibbly, but it's the way we work here, we like neutral, reliable and verifiable information, otherwise your articles have a good chance of getting removed. Regards! Franamax (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * okay, I'll will do my best to do those things. First of all, my backround in website design is zero, I've been teaching myself how to create these webpages by anaylizing how its done on the "edit" pages of other entrys.  So forgive me if I'm not good at these Wikipedia customs like signing.

I wasn't told by my organization to make this, I got this idea myself and asked if I could do this and they said yes. I have tryed to keep this article as nuetral as possible, including looking for any controveries surronding the council, and I think I have a fairly objectitive view of the council. I specifically left out an "impacts on policy and government" beacuse I thought that would be too hard to present in a neutral point of view. Okay all this copyright mumbo-jumbo is a little bit over my head and the communitcations VP is going to take the time to authorize anything so ill simply just reword the text so its not a direct cut and paste.

G 19:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC) (That's supposed to be a signature..)

Editing
Okay I have gone through and revised it once more so it will not fall under copyright violation. I also reworte it to make it more neutral. If anything still jumps out at you as not nuetral, please note it.

~G 17:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I have edited it once more, and added more 3rd party sources.


 * ~G 17:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

People
The list of people in the article doesn't do much more than provide publicity for the members. It doesn't add value to the article. As such I am removing it. Toddst1 (talk) 14:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)