Talk:Foreign Service officer

message: FSOs can also be from the Department Commerce and the Dept of Agriculture Mikebar (talk) 06:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: As is this article is of dubious value and looks like a good candidate to merge with the Foreign Service article.   That article covers the role of "Foreign Service Officers" as well as Specialists and others who serve in the Foreign Service.  Also, I see no need for commentary about a labor union here, and as labor unions go, AFSA is hardly "powerful", given that membership is optional (open shop) and the organization lacks the right to strike.SONORAMA (talk) 12:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Foreign Service? 

message: Yes, and this article left out the FSOs of other foreign affairs agencies, so I have added some text about the FSOs of Commerce, USAID, and Agriculture.  Also corrected the bit about FSOs being commissioned by the Senate -- my commission certificate is signed by the President and Secretary of State, not by the Speaker of the House, and the Constitution says commissioned officers of the United States (including us) shall be commissioned by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.  As for the article standing alone, I think it stands alone well, but should be cross-referenced with wiki links to other Foreign Service- and foreign affairs-related articles.  Amustard (talk) 04:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed

message: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources
The references for the size of the FS workforce seem inadequate.  I looked briefly and could not find better ones.  In my edit of details regarding USAID Foreign Service positions, I did point the article to the more general US Foreign Service article for the reference to the size of the State workforce, but the reference there is no better.  Any help? Jctakoma (talk) 05:51, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Citing Sources

message: This assertion is disputed by other categories of diplomats. They may consider themselves the 'top tier', but that view does not represent a consensus among U.S. diplomats. I added the term 'sometimes' to soften the assertion, but recommend that it be deleted.Dazibao (talk) 08:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ='the top tier'

message: Stop editing the article to exclude the Specialist ranks.  Specialists are "FSOs" and are "diplomats"http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/group.php?gid=10328646356 just like the Generalists, as evinced by the "officer"http://careers.state.gov/specialist/employment.html in many of their titles and pounded home in orientation (One team, anyone?).  Depending on the post, they are afforded the exact same diplomatic immunities and privileges as Foreign Service Generalists; and in the cases where they are not it is due to the requirements of the host government, not the Foreign Service.  There are certainly differences in commissioning authority and role, but all fall under the colloquialism of "Foreign Service Officers".  If you want to make the distinction between Generalists and Specialists, perhaps you should split the pages- but the FSO page should include both.  Kmhseo (talk) 01:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Generalist vs. "FSO" vs. Specialist'

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Foreign Service Officer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100831212917/http://careers.state.gov:80/general/about-us.html to http://careers.state.gov/general/about-us.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:46, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. Clear consensus for the move with no opposition. (non-admin closure) Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 02:18, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Foreign Service Officer →  – Most reliable secondary sources use a lowercase “officer” when referring to this position, denoting it as a common noun. Examples: NY Times: “he applied to become a Foreign Service officer after”, AP: “A retired Foreign Service officer has pleaded guilty”, WaPo: "is a retired Foreign Service officer who served at U.S. embassies” Shivertimbers433 (talk) 23:28, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 23 April 2023