This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This page still reads like it was written by people who work for the organization, or maybe by Carolyn Lukensmeyer herself. This needs major trimming to remotely resemble an encyclopedia article.
A few random examples of the sort of language that seems PR-ish and inappropriate:
informed, lasting decisions
engaging, meaningful opportunities
addressed some of the toughest issues facing the global community
But the biggest problem is that the article should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources, not on internal documents and websites. I suspect that the article would be easily reduced to something like the proper length if only material that appears in such sources was retained. -- Mwanner | Talk 21:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely, this entire article is a giant puff piece written by IP address accounts and accounts which solely edited this article and highly-related ones. I have pared it down and will make some changes so it is encyclopedic, not a PR puff piece. Do not return material to the article unless it is encyclopedic! Wikipedia is not a PR press release! Ruy Lopez (talk) 01:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]