Talk:War Industries Board

Change Format?
Can someone change the format? I don't think wikipedia endorses the "school report" format with an included bibliography
 * Done. If that material belongs in Wikipedia, it belongs in the individual articles.  If anyone wants to move it, it's still in the article history.  The very first sentence I checked was incorrect, so I didn't bother. - Crosbiesmith (talk) 21:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Biased
It seems very biased, and leftist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.233.83.120 (talk) 19:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The remark itself appears to be biased; without a point of reference, examples. The section is not helpful nor constructive. Moreover, it is unsigned and old (2008). I nominate that this section be deleted. RWymant@lk 17:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Lack of information
The article fails to address the ending of the War Industries Board.
 * I know most of that history. I'm actively looking for sources to cite. RWymant@lk 17:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Original members?
The text says "seven" original members of the board, but the bullet points list eight. Dgorsline (talk) 12:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * @Dgorsline, good point, I did some research and found the 7 original members in American Industry in the War: A Report of the War Industries Board. New York: Prentice-Hall, p.22.Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum (talk) 03:28, 10 April 2018 (UTC)