Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 55

message: Has there been any consideration of creating a library of sorts of links to books which have been (legally) scanned and put online which relate to military history?  I was going through Google Books and was quite surprised by the number of full-text material available.  I'm thinking that there is probably a lot more then GB, the US Center of Military History and HyperWar that I'm not aware off.  Plus it'd be convenient to have it all (essentially) at our fingertips instead of scanning through several different repositories.  Oberiko 21:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've been working on putting together bibliographies on a per-task force basis; presumably such links can just be added to those? Kirill Lokshin 22:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That could work.  My only initial concern would be the redundancy (likely each resource would be listed for three or more task forces) but, Wikipedia's not paper so I guess that's not a problem.  Thanks Kirill. Oberiko 05:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's great naval manuals online at http://www.HNSA.org . Emoscopes Talk 12:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Library of online book links

message: Maybe it's just me, but the War article on wikipedia seems to be of remarkably low quality, in both style and content. Considering that so many other military history pages are of such high quality (IMHO), why is this the case? Does anybody concur with me on this, or is the War article generally considered good? -DWRZ 22:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's actually true in pretty much every area; the more specific an article, the easier it is to get it to a good state.  The problem with War is that the topic is so broad that nobody really has a clear picture of how the article should be organized and what it should cover; add to that the high level of vandalism and the frequent POV battles, and the chances of that article improving begin to look rather slim. Kirill Lokshin 22:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with everything you said completely. Still, isn't all that an extra reason to at least try to make the article better? Gather up frequent and respected editors of military history pages, protect the article, and work together on a re-write? Just an idea. -DWRZ 03:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do try to work on the subject, but it is quite difficult, battles are much much easier. There might be some structural problems why it is difficult to get wars to FA, but I'm still not sure how to adress them. Wandalstouring 12:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: War Article Low Quality?

message: The A-Class review for Armament of the Iowa class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 15:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Armament of the Iowa class battleship]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for Battle of Khe Sanh is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Battle of Khe Sanh]] now open 

message: The Battle of Crécy article has been nominated at the Wikipedia:Article Creation and Improvement Drive. It is a key article for the Hundred Years War, and should be important for any encyclopedia, yet it is only start class and fails on referencing sources.  --Grimhelm 16:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We have quite a lot of important material which isonly start, but has at least an article. Feel free to do the improvement, Grimhelm. Wandalstouring 17:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Battle of Crécy]] at [[WP:ACID]] 

message: I nominated American Civil War for A-Class. --Pupster21 19:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, not quite; you didn't actually add the nomination to the review page. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review 

message: The A-Class review for American Civil War is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 19:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[American Civil War]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for World War II is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 19:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[World War II]] now open 

message: The A-Class review for Actions along the Matanikau (September – October 1942) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 00:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Actions along the Matanikau (September – October 1942)]] now open 

message: A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Battle of Khe Sanh; please stop by and help review the article!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 19:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Battle of Khe Sanh]] needs attention 

message: A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for American Civil War; please stop by and help review the article!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 01:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[American Civil War]] needs attention 

message: Could you please guys see if ECHELON fits for the Military technology and engineering & the Military science task forces? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 15:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nominally Echelon should be in MilHist as it's an Intel collection capability.  That article concerns me as it's based mainly on speculation and marginally reliable sources (C3 to D5 classification).ALR 15:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been watching it for a while and i totally agree w/ you in that it is full of speculations which i never could verify. Any idea about how to sort that out? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 15:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Before we go any further, what is 'C3 to D5` classification? Suggestion; I tend to think importing a good chunk frm Nicky Hager's 'Secret Power' & James Bamford's 'The Puzzle Palace' would help. Buckshot06 17:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, entirely appropriate to a discussion of Intelligence :) Sources are graded for quality and consistency, hence the available sources are of mediocre quality and low consistency.  Bamford is ok, C3, I don't know Hager so couldn't comment.ALR 18:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Reads rather conspiricy-ish, for hte moment where not pressed to tag it, so I recommend we dont start with hard ot verify articles. Unless we want Tesla deveices and USS Eldridge (DE-173) poping up in the task force.--Dryzen 20:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: In terms of progressing it, needs a lot of the low gradee references ripped out and dropped down to basic information; Echelon is an Int system, supported by the AusCanNZUKUS community, thought to allow etc.  Allegations of economic espionage.ALR 08:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[ECHELON]]

message: A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for Actions along the Matanikau (September – October 1942); please stop by and help review the article!  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 01:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[Actions along the Matanikau (September – October 1942)]] needs attention 

message: Sorry guys, but I've put the article Invasion up for FAR here. Don't try & cabal it's way through, but rather try & fix the concerns given. Thanks guys & sorry for being a spoil sport... Spawn Man 11:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Invasion]] up for review: 

message: Given that saying something is 'A-Class' should mean it is the 'cream of the crop' so to speak, shouldn't the process for reviewing it involve more than two people over the space of two days? I'd suggest keeping reviews open for a week. Adding a note here when it is closed would also help, I think. JCSeer 23:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The reviews are open for four days, not two; while I'm not really set against making the duration longer, I'm not convinced that it's necessary. Kirill Lokshin 23:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class Reviews 

message: Do we even need to debate this? Albrecht 01:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ooh, it's quite well populated. heehee :) on a more serious note, that is definitely a candidate for CfD. Emoscopes Talk 01:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, looks like CFD fodder. Kirill Lokshin 03:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Surprisingly enough, there seem to be some people defending it on the grounds that it's "accurate". :-\ Kirill Lokshin 19:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And some people call the French 'frogs'. Welcome to a biased world where we make lists of defeats from country we don't like, so everyone can how much they suck. Wandalstouring 20:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another gem