Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Australian Defence Force
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
This article was peer reviewed in March and I now believe that it may have now reached A-class standard. As part of the A-class review I'd really appreciate any suggestions on how to further improve the article to FA status. --Nick Dowling 00:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Is definitely A-Class material, but first sentence is a bit awkward. --Pupster21 Talk To Me 19:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Superlative article. Sets the standard for what articles about current military organizations should look like. Great work. Cla68 04:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggestion: are there any areas of major criticism of the ADF (Im thinking like the crime/corruption section of Russian Ground Forces) which should be added to give a fully balanced viewpoint, thinking of full FA status? Buckshot06 09:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a good point and thank you for the suggestion. While the ADF doesn't suffer anything like the Russian military's problems it does face a couple of significant issues; namely its ability to conduct high-intensity warfare is very limited and it is suffering from serious shortages of skilled personnel. Both these issues are touched on in the article at present, but could be expanded as they do represent significant limitations. --Nick Dowling 11:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Im not suggesting the ADF does suffer anything like the problems the Russians face! However a section on lack of skilled personnel could be very useful, as it is a problem faced by most Western armies; once you've done a bit on it for the ADF it could be run with for the US, UK, NZ etc... Buckshot06 12:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Have watched it grow from a stub to a comprehensive article, well done. Hossen27 14:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.