Why did you take out specific classical references if you value the origin of the term?  The Republic reference specifically relates to the same concept as killed in action.  The article has a lot of damage, and I hope to handle it better.

Along with gifts to KIA families and sales to others, someone sent our nonprofit, the USA KIA/DOW Family Foundation (USAKIA), an E-mail asking what "DOW" stood for, and even that's been damaged in the article.  It's standard to use a left out term in brackets whereas someone's even removed the brackets.  I had to tell the person and mentioned Wikipedia and its problems, something I have also investigated and pursued further.

Larry Sanger, a founder of the Wikimedia Foundation, wrote a relevant article on what's going on here, a lack of respect to references and authority.  See his "Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism" article.  I would also call the hypocrisy uncivil (WP:CIVIL).  

I do plan to update the article further and request arbitration in Wikipedia, specifically use different formatting for the references but provide them at the end of the sentence rather.  However, I also have other things to do which have higher priority right now.