Talk:United Service Organizations

message: What happened to all the accurate information concerning USO indiscretions?  Whittled away by USO PR while Wikipedia looks away?  Is Wikipedia simply "ad space" for these entities now?  What gives?
Wikipedia:  you allow FAR too much discretion in allowing the entities themselves to toot their own horn (and to remove derogatory, yet truthful information) at will, greatly damaging the reputation of Wikipedia.
--JJ--  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:6:2347:D433:2CF1:BE2B:54D0:802C (talk) 15:36, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 2017 comment

message: Grade inaccuracy: In November and December 1968 Jennie and Terrie Frankel (the Doublemint Twins) performed in Vietnam with the USO - Hollywood Overseas Committee[29] and were shepherded around Vietnam by escort officers (USO Performers were given GS15 ratings[clarification needed], equivalent to generals, to help maintain their safety) to entertain troops in the field, where larger USO shows could not perform. 
I've never done this before, so apologize if I break standards, but GS15 is US COL (O-6) equivalent, not "equivalent to generals."  Source being that I was a GS14, and there are plenty of resources online WRT the US Federal Government to confirm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.94.76 (talk) 11:47, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: 2018 comment

message: Over the years, everything objective in this article has been whittled out by the USO propaganda machine. This is now a USO advertisement. For example, the references to their CEO earning nearly half a million dollars a year, along with his military retirement pay. While many of the lower echelon employees and volunteers truly serve the military members, the mid- and upper staff shaves cream off the top. Company cars from sponsors and more. Management, you should be ashamed although I doubt you have any ounce of it in you.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.246.251.6 (talk) 23:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The first paragraph of the section implies his personal contributions were unique, it seems. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:38, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: General Comments

message: "Songwriter Irving Berlin took the entire 100-person, all-soldier cast of his Broadway production “This Is the Army,” on tour in Europe in 1942, raising nearly $10 million for the Army Emergency Relief Fund."
This seems a little odd, as a European tour wouldn't have been possible before 1943 as Europe was enemy-occupied. IMDB confirms the "This Is The Army" film is from 1943; would it be possible to get a source for this tour?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.74.92.208 (talk) 18:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Europe Tour in 1942

message: While the cleanup was excellent, we're left with a wiki which continues to look more like one of the USO's own press releases.  When factual entries are even remotely negative, they're removed or edited.  The USO president's compensation is mysteriously absent now.  If we want slant, we can all go view the USO's $1,000,000 (yes, $1 million) website.  I prefer to believe we want encyclopedic truths.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.45.122.180 (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: March 2009 overhaul

message: I'm still new at Wiki editing so bear with me. I did notice that the the table listing the financials did not add up correctly. I noticed a $237,349 discrepancy.  If there is no objections I would like to modify the table using data from the 2012 annual report  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deano252 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Mathematical error in Financials

message: Rob, the reasons the picture of Miss USO has been taken down are:
*There is no such person as Miss USO.  The person depicted is a former Miss USO of Metropolitan NY, but she in no way represents the USO world headquarters mission.
*Only about 20 percent of the USO's mission is entertainment.  If an entertainment photo is going to be used, it should be one that represents USO-sponsored entertainment, not a singing troupe that is  authorized to perform only in the greater NYC area.  More than than, though, as important as our entertainers are, we want people to know that the USO is about the day-to-day, 365 days a year service of people at USO centers around the world.  More than 33,000 volunteers deliver a consistent message of support to troops -- most of whom never see a USO show during their military tours.
*If it seems this is coming from the  USO, there's a reason for that.  It is.  One of my jobs here is to do all I can to ensure that our brand is portrayed properly.  I will continue to do that.  A member of our staff has been assigned to monitor online use of the USO and its mission, and she is the person who has been taking down that picture -- at my direction and encouragement.
*There are a lot of public domain photos out there, and most of them have nothing to do with the USO.  The one of the Metro NY USO troupe is fine for the NYC USO's website, but not for an entry in an international source for information.
Thanks for understanding
John Hanson
Senior VP, Marketing and Communication —This unsigned comment is by 65.165.212.164 (talk • contribs) .
:A more constructive approach is suggest another photo, that's in the public domain, that better illustrates USO entertainment.  Also, I would point out, there is an issue apart from the picture.  This is a Wikipedia page, and it is about the USO, but is not run by the USO.  You're welcome to explain mistakes/misunderstandings (as you've done, and are thanked for).  But you are not going to control, or direct the content of this page.  Aside from the picture, there have been a number of other anon edits (probably through the USO) which have been promotional in nature.  That's not ok.  Any, and all information on this page, should be neutral in tone.  As an example "Today, the USO is alive and well, observing 65 years of serving our men and women in uniform and their families around the world." is totally unacceptable in tone.  That's advertising, and its not allowed (Also, they are not "our" men and women, because this ain't an American-only place).  So feel free to participate, and edit the article (I suggest getting one account for your org), but only to provide neutral independently verifiable information.  (p.s. I removed the photo, for now, and wish to find a better one)--Rob 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: United Service Organizations

message: Here's some things I think this article needs:
*A complete explanation of the structure of the organization, and its subunits
*A breakdown of where its resources come from, and go to (with neutral sources, of course)
*A non-promotional explanation of non-tour things the organiation does.  A lot of info has been removed for being promotional, but it needs to come back, in a neutral manner.
*A good explanation of system oversight and control of the organization.
I think a problem with this article, is that some editors are informed, but bias; while other editors are neutral but uninformed (I'm guilty of not being informed).  We need informed editors, to put in neutral, accurate, verified, sourced information.  --Rob 19:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested improvements

message: "The United Service Organizations (USO) is a volunteer organization ..." is intrinsically confusing.  Is it one organization or several?  JackofOz 12:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, it is an organization of organizations.  That seems perfectly reasonable. But the article, does need to be improved to better explain the inter-relationships. --Rob 21:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's perfectly reasonable to have a structure whereby Organization A comprises organizations B, C and D etc.  But to give Organization A a plural name seems crazy to me.  As an analogy, the Commonwealth of Nations consists of a number of countries, some of which are republics, some of which are monarchies, and some of which are themselves commonwealths.  The Commonwealth is still a single entity and therefore takes a singular name.  It is not "the Commonwealths".  Maybe it's just my crazy antipodean logic.  JackofOz 06:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guesse it's like "The United States" which can be used as a singular word referring to the federation (the modern standard) or a plural word referring the states (more common in the past).  Anyway, I think the main justification for the current wording, is that the USO itself, refers to itself, in the singular, not the plural.  It just doesn't look "funny" when they do it, because they always use the abbreviation "USO", instead of spelling it out (putting the spelled out name in brackets). --Rob 07:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense now.  The USA analogy reminds me of the United Nations, which we have no difficulty in conceptualising as a single entity.  But if you give it its full title United Nations Organisation, and extend that to the USO, you'd end up with United Service Organizations Organization.  I now see why they kept it the way it is, despite the risk of crackpots like me quibbling from time to time.  Cheers  JackofOz 11:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How many organizations?

message: The following are some references that could be used to add quotes and cite various parts of the article, especially the lead section which might benefit from more details. The text is verbatim from the source listed so feel free to use anything. Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional sources

message: ==Parody{?}==
* In Gents without Cents the Three Stooges did a parody of entertainers at a shipyard of USO routine???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.126.88 (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: Why is this poorly written sentence in the article?:
:"From June 8 to 11, 2009, T.V. personality Stephen Colbert traveled to Iraq to film his show The Colbert Report for four days in a USO sponsored event."
If no one has any objections, I'll remove it.PokeHomsar (talk) 07:52, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why?

message: User talk:TwinsofSedona, who is apparently one of the original Doublemint Twins, has added unsourced material based on her personal attendance with the 1968 chicago USO tour. I really hope we can get sources on this somehow. she has added 2 nice images, here and here, to the Commons, which might be appropriate here. oh, heres a link: Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:53, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced additions from one who was there

message: The list of entertainers during World War II seems awfully messy and perhaps it could be reorganized into more of a list form.  If it's going to be too long for this page, perhaps it could be done as a separate page. (Satanhhh (talk) 10:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  List Of WWII Entertainers Cleanup 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on United Service Organizations. 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/20140812095250/http://www2.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/US%20Marines%20In%20Lebanon%201982-1984%20PCN%2019000309800.pdf to http://www2.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/US%20Marines%20In%20Lebanon%201982-1984%20PCN%2019000309800.pdf
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) 08:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: So I was appalled to see the bulky "List of WWII entertainers section on the page, and really want to move it all to another page. I'm thinking of creating a "List of entertainers who performed for American troops" article. List of entertainers who performed for American troops in Vietnam is one such article, but I think maybe it would make more sense to do it for all wars/time periods with different sections. Figured I'd see if anyone on this page had thoughts before I started doing it. - - mathmitch7 (talk/contribs) 20:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the same idea, although I haven't done anything with it as I was waiting to see what ::others said on the subject.  It's definitely way too bulky and a bit of a cluster.Satanhhh (talk) 10:02, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  New "List of USO Performers" article? 

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) 21:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: This person has a poor stub and it could be expanded and linked to this article. Bearian (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jane Hope Hastings]] 

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) 23:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion