Talk:Australian Navy Cadets

message: The rank structure of instructors are wrong in this article.  They are
Cheif Petty Officer CPO
Petty officer PO
Unit surport volenteer USV
I am a cadet at the moment so if you would like to email we for conformation email me <e-mail redacted>
Could someone please change this or if you want i can
USV's are not considered as instructors.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.33.164.211 (talk) 03:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ranks 

message: If Anyone knows the abreviation for Naval Airman could they please write it in?
cheers, Jez 14 08:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Specialisations

message: Cadets do not take part in fire fighting activities
somebody please change this —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.253.95.123 (talk) 01:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Activities 

message: :Image:ISCA logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:ISCA logo.gif

message: Someone using a username of ANC AsstDirInfoSystems edited this article, with a summary of "Removed criticisms as they are not appropriate for public release." Wikipedia is not censored. I am not saying that the removed material was appropriate, but the username seems to imply rather strongly that the editor in question has a conflict of interest here. The user has been blocked anyway, as the username was in violation of our standards. --Orange Mike  | Talk 03:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest? 

message: :Image:RAN cadets crest.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:RAN cadets crest.gif

message: I've started a History section on the ANC page. I'd like to see some addittional accurate (and referenced) historical information added. Does anybody have useful material they can put forward? Thanks. Jake R (talk) 09:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the ANC 

message: Due to increasing red tape some cadet units are unable to perform core activities. One such example of this is the regulation that Australian Navy Cadet vessels be towed with an Australian Defence Force vehicle, when being transported. This is affects units in country areas and other regions that experience difficulty obtaining access to a Defence vehicle. Without such a vehicle the cadets cannot perform waterborne activities. 
In addition, some feel that the upper command echelons have lost touch with the primal concepts that draw young people to the cadets. The perceived need to "bubble wrap cadets" has meant a loss of the adventure that set cadets apart from other youth groups such as the scouts.
This may be a factor in the decreasing membership of Australian Navy Cadet Training Ships, with  only 2000 cadets across Australia. This compares to an approximate combined total of 20,000 cadets in the other two services.
In NSW units, waterborne activities have been curtailed due to a lack of qualified staff to supervise these activities. Many ANC staff have little or no military experience and are frequently shown up for their lack of ability. This contrasts with the Australian Army Cadets with many of their staff being ex-Army or serving Army Reservists. The ANC in NSW some years ago enjoyed the services of many former RAN or Merchant Navy professional seaman as staff members; however, over time these members have become disaffected with the "professional cadet" element amongst some senior staff that is an emerging factor.
These statements need to be verified.
Unfortunately due to resources and practical limitations we cannot go about creating empirical evidence about these criticisms. However i dare you to ask any serving instructor below the rank of lieutenant to what state the ANC is in and they will return with positive affirmation of the criticisms removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vcj89 (talk • contribs) 08:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticisms

message: Redacted by AusTerrapin (talk) in accordance with WP:SOAP
--Proud2b-K363 (talk) 01:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: “JUST ADD WATER” by proud2bK363

message: I removed the uniforms section as it was inaccurate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.135.133 (talk) 02:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, maybe I'll do up a RAN Uniforms page with the corect the names out of ABR 81. For the moment I'll remove it because it's incorrect.--LukeSearle (talk) 07:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ANC Uniforms 

message: TS Hobart is not the only band unit in the ADFC. 233 Ceremonial Flight (AAFC) and Australian Army Cadet Band Sydney are also band units  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Will567 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Band Units

message: This unit is not a former unit. It's name was changed to TS Condamine. Just as TS Albatross was once known as TS Beatty.
:Hi, WP recognises that fact, however the fact that the names were used is important in the history of the ANC, the list contains a column entitled 'Notes' there it will state the current disposition of the unit, active or otherwise. Nford24 (talk) 08:04, 7 September 2011 (AEST)
Also left out TS Campbelltown and TS Parramatta.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.125.86 (talk) 08:51, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  TS Perth Manly NSW 

message: Just a suggestion that the section where it has the flotillas and units as well as national cmdr's etc be moved under the organisation section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajbrown2 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Units and Flotillas should be before ranks becuase it reads better as the intro paragraph talks about unit first and then ranks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.125.86 (talk) 08:10, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up? 

message: There is an illustration of one here [] 220.238.42.127 (talk) 12:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current ensign