Talk:National Archives and Records Administration

message: Over on Talk:Panay incident, we had a little confusion over whether the contents of the NARA publication Prologue Magazine are in the public domain. I asked, they responded:
:Features written by NARA staff are in the public domain. Prologue does not hold any copyright, but individual authors may choose to copyright.  Trevor Plante is a NARA archivist, and therefore his article is in the public domain. Copyrighted articles are indicated by the (c) symbol after the author's name. 
:Even though there is no copyright, we are interested to know where Prologue features are reprinted and ask that, as a courtesy, Prologue is given as the source.
:Thank you for inquiring.
:Mary C. Ryan
:Policy & Communications Staff - NPOL
The contents in question were by a specific author. However, the response applies to all contents of the magazine. Hopefully this won't come up again.
-- Cyrius 20:14, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Prologue Magazine

message: does any one know if the National Archives is open to public? (not the exhibit) Today i went in (the front door facing north) and the security at the door bared me, saying somethig about i need to be a researcher. Xah Lee 02:33, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)
yes, it's open to the public. certain areas are restricted to researchers, but the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, etc. are all in public exhibits. I went today, actually.
I agree.... some areas are bared off for certian reasons... I should know  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.106.56.101 (talk) 03:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: open to public?

message: I removed the "See Also" section, since it contained nothing but a link to the National Archives of the United Kingdom, which has no direct affiliation with NARA.  The British counterpart for the United States National Archives is irrelevant.
I'm not so sure about that, the NARA has a copy of the English Magna Carta in it's vaults does it not? a document that lays the foundations for the documents of the charters of freedom...so in that sense, it should be linked.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.101.203 (talk) 17:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: UK National Archives

message: Fellow contributors, I removed the "citations missing" tag and replaced it with the "refimprove" tag, as noted in my edit summary.  At the time of my edit, there are three inline citations, but this article could benefit from a few more sources.  I placed the tag above the==References==section.  The template suggests placing this tag at either the top or the bottom of an article, so I apologize if I have over-extended my interpretation of the template guidelines.  I felt that three citations was at least strong enough to remove the banner from the top of the page. Ukulele 04:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional citations needed

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 15:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject class rating

message: The article currently states:
:It holds the original copies of the three main formative documents of the United States and its government: the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
Since nobody knows what King George did with the original of the Declaration of Independence, it seems somewhat unlikely that it's located in the National Archives...  Tomertalk 04:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it depends on what we mean by "original."  From United States Declaration of Independence:  "After finalizing the text on July 4, Congress issued the Declaration of Independence in several forms. It was initially published as a printed broadside that was widely distributed and read to the public. The most famous version of the Declaration, a signed copy that is usually regarded as the Declaration of Independence, is on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. According to most historians, Congress signed this document on August 2, 1776, and not on July 4, as is often believed."  So what is on display is not the first signed copy, but it is a contemporary version with original signatures, so to simply call it a copy would be inaccurate.  "An original" rather than "the original"?  Postdlf (talk) 22:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fact check!

message: Is this of relevance here ... 
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/arts/nazi-art-theft-material-to-be-unveiled-by-us-national-archives/507619 
Benyoch ...Don't panic! Don't panic!... (talk)  06:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article of interest, perhaps? 

message: I know NARA has a relationship to Wikimedia in that they see WM/WP as gateways to their collections.  Why isn't something about that in this article? --kosboot (talk) 03:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Because you haven't added it yet? Int21h (talk) 02:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: <grin> - ...when I have time to assemble the sources. -- kosboot (talk) 18:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration with Wikimedia 

message: I doubt that because some Wikipedians keep deleting the reference to them on a particular article.  Is there any (better) way to cite them in any article?  I just want to add references to historical records.  Though that might not agree with the claims of other guys, those are just the records which used to be (and probably are) officially correct. Wordmasterexpress (talk) 07:54, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are the documents archived in NARA referable source in Wikipedia? 

message: The section title "Notable crimes" hilariously sounds like it refers to crimes the National Archives committed, not crimes committed against the National Archives. Anyone have suggestions for renaming it? Can't think of anything.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by In vivo veritas (talk • contribs) 02:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: How does "Notable thefts" sound? Verumregium (talk) 20:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rephrase the section title "Notable crimes" 

message: I'm going to edit and move the sentences about the ICE records lawsuit from History to Controversies. Verumregium (talk) 20:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ICE records lawsuit 

message: Please update the annual budget with the most recent figures.Chantern15 (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: And the number of active employees.Chantern15 (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! Verumregium (talk) 00:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annual Budget Update for 2021 

message: Is what Donald Trump took really a "Theft"??? From the "National Archives"???
Not yet having full information, I suggest the contributor is being pejorative. Much more likely to have been a failure to turn over upon demand than a theft from the Archive, like the other entries... 2A02:C7D:566C:BA00:6584:B7A5:F266:9EE9 (talk) 05:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable thefts 

message: I wonder if the section discussing the Trump administration is too large and/or misplaced in the article given its significance relative to everything else? It feels to me like right now it is coming across as more important than the archivists, records, recovery team, founders, etc.
Ebrown29 (talk) 02:30, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section about Trump administration