Template:Did you know nominations/Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense
edit- ... that an independent Chief Management Officer of the U.S. Department of Defense position was rejected in 2007, but was created in February 2018? Source: "DoD's response was to disclaim the need for a new chief management officer... In September 2007, the Secretary of Defense formally assigned chief management roles and responsibilities to the Deputy Secretary." [1]
- ALT1: ... that the new Chief Management Officer of the U.S. Department of Defense position outranks the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force? Source: "Jay Gibson, DoD's first chief management officer, and third-in-command after the defense secretary and deputy defense secretary..." [2]; "The new CMO will have independent authority to order the the secretaries of the Army, Navy and Air Force to implement reforms..." [3]
- Reviewed: Zettabyte Era
Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:07, 28 February 2018 (UTC).
Hi, I came to put this into the DYK queue, but the article does not seem to have the claim referred to by ALT1 - can this be looked into? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:44, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: The lead says the CMO "is the third-in-command of the department after the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense"; the three military secretaries are not in that list and so are outranked by the CMO. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 01:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Antony-22: Okay, can you pop that somewhere in the article (I see that's in the source above), then we'll be good to get this back into the queue. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:21, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Done. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 23:01, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- Good stuff. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Done. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 23:01, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Antony-22: Okay, can you pop that somewhere in the article (I see that's in the source above), then we'll be good to get this back into the queue. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:21, 12 April 2018 (UTC)