Talk:Peaceful penetration

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Peaceful penetration. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unsw.adfa.edu.au/~rmallett/Thesis/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems that there is not a great deal of understanding about this expression. "Pénétration Pacifique" was coined by French Foreign Minister Théophile Delcassé to describe French policy towards Morocco in the early 20th century: control by economic means and the assimilation of the indigenous culture. As Anglo-German trade rivalry grew, it was adopted more widely, especially by the British Press to describe German erosion of Britain's dominance of international trade. It was sometimes used as a direct loan-word (in French) or in anglicised form.
The term was adopted by some Australians during 1918, but the habit was nowhere near as simple as described in this article. There is no explanation of why it is described as "peaceful" when it clearly was not. Some sources credit C.W. Bean, the Official Historian, with bestowing the name. Jordan (2017) argues that the term “peaceful penetration” was used by higher command, sometimes for actions other than stealth raids, and that the term did not emanate from the original stealth raiders. The men who carried out these raids used a great variety of nicknames for this type of operation. But above all, as Bean points out, the use of the term was appropriated from the British Press and applied "ironically" by the Australians, on the grounds that such raids were necessarily violent.
It was my intention to write an proper article about this, but there are only 24 hours in a day. One is tempted to say that disambiguation is actually extremely necessary. The infantry tactic is clearly an adjunct of the original. But probably better is to name the article after its original meaning (Delcassé's) and explain in a subsection its subsequent adoption in some form by certain Australians. Otherwise it becomes another Australocentric bit of Wikimisinformation. Hengistmate (talk) 12:52, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Until an article is written there is no need to disambiguate. See Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Deciding_to_disambiguate: "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead." My italics. Write the article, and then it can be decided where disambiguation is needed per the advice I posted on your talkpage a while ago. If you need some help deciding which article needs disambiguating, or if a disamb page needs creating, when you have finished creating the article, then ping me, and we can talk about it. SilkTork (talk) 13:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not well-informed.