Talk:William Arkin

Reads like a resume

This article reads like a resume or a bio sharing this individual's accomplishments. For many paragraphs from "Arkin led Greenpeace International's research..." to the end of the article "On January 4, 2019, Arkin resigned from NBC News....", the writing essentially just shares Arkin's positions/books/awards and a few of his essays/books. In fact, I count six paragraphs that simply serve to list one or multiple (up to nine) positions.

There is little commentary on the impact/response to this work aside from awards, either because these positions/publications were not notable (whether he is notable is indeed a matter of dispute based on this talk page) or because this piece was intentionally written to burnish Arkin's accomplishments. The first paragraph under the Work section, "Arkin served in U.S. Army intelligence..." does this analysis better because these actions were actually noteworthy, but it does not read neutrally. Much like the rest of the piece, it reads like a resume-like bio.

If we compare this entire article with the bio he's cowritten for himself at the Washington Post (link), the tone and even assertions/factual material is almost identical. For example, this paragraph from the Washington Post bio is virtually identical to the second-to-last paragraph in the Wikipedia article.

From the Washington Post:

Arkin has briefed the findings of his investigations before a number of government audiences, including the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the CIA, various offices on the Air Staff and various senior service schools and war colleges, the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, naval intelligence, the Central Air Forces (CENTAF) staff, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Photographic Interpretation Center, the Joint Warfare Analysis Center (JWAC), and various "Lessons Learned" projects (Operation Enduring Look, the Gulf War Air Power Survey (GWAPS), Center for Naval Analysis). Arkin has also served as a consultant on Iraq to the office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

From the Wikipedia article:

Arkin has advised the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the CIA, various offices on the Air Staff and various senior service schools and war colleges, the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, naval intelligence, the United States Air Forces Central Command, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Photographic Interpretation Center, the Joint Warfare Analysis Center, and various "Lessons Learned" projects (Operation Enduring Look, the Gulf War Air Power Survey (GWAPS), Center for Naval Analysis).[2] He has also been a consultant on Iraq to the office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

This is circumstantial evidence that this article was written either by the subject himself or one of his coworkers who wrote that bio.

Untitled

Is the author of this page working on an update to include the events relating to William Arkin's controversial Washington Post column? I noticed the link was put in, but no reference in the article. Also, is there anything more to say about this guy other than what's already in this stub, or should it just be deleted? :::Wiki Reviewer :::

It looks like some information was put in...perhaps a more detailed description could be added in the future. I have been researching this guy some and have found out that there really isn't that much to mention. Though I was intrigued to find out that after working for Greenpeace and continuing to denounce all things related to "Global Warming", William Arkin has no problem driving a big SUV.

Edits 2011-09-26

I removed some unsourced statements that had stood tagged for TWO YEARS. Don't do that "tagging" crap. If you see some unsourced crap in a BLP, remove it NOW, don't tag it. That's what you're suppose to do.

I've also removed an unnecessary section heading "Controversy". This isn't a good idea. He's a controversial guy, so the term "biography" is just fine. --TS 00:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)