Talk:Director of National Intelligence

message: What is up with the "External links" dumping ground. A section, subsection, and eleven links fertilizing a link farm where three or four would be more than enough! Maybe someone can take a look at trimming or integrating. Otr500 (talk) 19:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: I think we should reconsider whether to have a whole section on Ratcliffe's proposed nomination. Sure, it was newsworthy at the time, but now it's yesterday's news - didn't even really pass the one-week test. And we don't have any detail in this article AT ALL about the nominations of the previous directors. Or in most other articles about cabinet level positions. I think we should reconsider whether this section even belongs here or whether it should be removed as WP:NOTNEWS. -- MelanieN (talk) 01:54, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it and I think it should go now. My bad. soibangla (talk) 01:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't know how it would turn out. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:12, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and removed it. The article doesn't discuss any other nominee, it's out of place. 173.217.182.134 (talk) 22:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  About that John Ratcliffe section 

message: In the lede, "The director of national intelligence (DNI)" should have lowercase "d", "n", and "I" per the closed RfC at RfC: First mention in the first sentence... (MOS:JOBTITLES). —Eyer (If you reply, add  to your message to let me know.) 21:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If "the president of the United States" ins't capitalized (per MOS:JOBTITLES), then why would "the director of national intelligence" be capitalized? —Eyer (If you reply, add  to your message to let me know.) 11:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:   If "the director of national intelligence" isn't capitalized, then why should "the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency", "the Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency", "the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff", and plethora of others should be? Anyway, as per your linked RfC, there is clearly broad dissatisfaction with the guideline in its current form. I'll resign and wait if there are any changes due to consensus with regards to MOS:JOBTITLES. Bulhis899 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

text:   Further addendum: in case you didn't catch it, I conceded to your edit on undoing my capitalization on "director" only because there is no clear community consensus on which standards Wikipedia should adhere to with regards to this issue. My edit was for consistency with other articles on this wiki about directors, secretaries, and other entities of a significant leadership role which is why I linked the above example articles.
Wikipedia uses MOS:JOBTITLES, not government sources, to determine capitalization. —Eyer (If you reply, add  to your message to let me know.) 01:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

text: Yes. See MOS:JOBTITLES and innumerable previous discussions (including very similar ones at what is presently Talk:Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (but should be moved to lower-case "chairman"). Unless it's prefixed to the person's name, the title is "director of national intelligence" in encyclopedic writing. Just in case anyone misunderstands the OP, see also MOS:ABBR: This stuff has nothing to do with how the initialism is rendered. Except for conventionalized cases that are near-universally rendered lower-case in English (e.g. "e.g." and "scuba"), or more rarely in mixed case (e.g. "DoJ"), acronyms and initialisms are always given in upper case regardless of the casing of the words that make up the acronym/initialism.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: I have added President-elect Biden’s nomination of Avril Haines to the article. But the date of her nomination is a bit ambiguous: Biden’s intention to nominate her first leaked to the press on Saturday, November 21, was confirmed by multiple sources on November 22, was confirmed by the transition office on November 23, and formally announced at an event in Wilmington with other national security nominees on Tuesday, November 24.
I have included the November 23 date in the article, given that this is the date when a) the incoming administration confirmed her nomination to the press, and b) the press referred to her as “nominated”, past tense. If there’s a more-correct official date to use, that should be substituted in the article. Informal words like “announced”, “named”, or “presented” could allow the use of the 22nd or 24th, but would mostly just increase the ambiguity in my opinion.
(Addendum: Also, in looking for sources to cite, I only found reputable news articles from Nov 23, using the past tense for “nominated”; it would be rather odd to cite a news source as authoritative when referring to an event that wouldn’t happen until after its publication—even if that event had since occurred.) TreyHarris (talk) 21:54, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination date of Avril Haines 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion