Military history WikiProject
Main project page + talk  → Discussion archives Style guide  → Essays Announcements and open tasks talk  → Articles needing attention  → Nominations for deletion talk  → New articles talk Assessment department talk  → New! A-Class FAQ  → New! B-Class FAQ  → New! Tag & Assess workshop Contest department talk Logistics department talk  → New! Copy-editing alerts Outreach department talk  → Stress hotline talk Review department talk  → New! Review alerts Special projects department talk Showcase  → Featured picture gallery Portals talk
Project organization Coordinators + talk Members talk  → Active  → Inactive Awards talk Project banner talk Project category Project history
Templates Infoboxes  → Firearm cartridge infobox talk  → Military award infobox talk  → Military conflict infobox talk  → Military memorial infobox talk  → Military person infobox talk  → Military structure infobox talk  → Military test site infobox talk  → Military unit infobox talk  → National military infobox talk  → War faction infobox talk  → Weapon infobox talk  → Command structure box talk  → Operational plan box talk  → Service record box talk Navigation boxes talk  → Campaignboxes talk Template design style talk
Task forces General topics Fortifications talk Intelligence talk Maritime warfare talk Military aviation talk Military biography talk Military historiography talk New! Military land vehicles talk Military memorials and cemeteries talk Military science talk Military technology and engineering talk National militaries talk War films talk Weaponry talk Nations and regions African military history talk Australian military history talk Balkan military history talk Baltic states military history talk British military history talk Canadian military history talk Chinese military history talk Dutch military history talk French military history talk German military history talk Indian military history talk Italian military history talk Japanese military history talk Korean military history talk Middle Eastern military history talk New Zealand military history talk Nordic military history talk Ottoman military history talk Polish military history talk Romanian military history talk Russian and Soviet military history talk South American military history talk Southeast Asian military history talk Spanish military history talk Taiwanese military history talk United States military history talk Periods and conflicts Classical warfare talk Medieval warfare talk Early Muslim military history talk Crusades talk Early Modern warfare talk American Revolutionary War talk Napoleonic era talk American Civil War talk World War I talk World War II talk
· changes

Contents 1 Banner icon 2 Scope 3 Peer review request for Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships 4 Blunders, mistakes and human factors 5 Peer review request for John Watts de Peyster 6 Peer review for Military Revolution now open 7 Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe GA Sweeps Review: On Hold 8 New article stub Military historiography created 9 Arthur Bryant 10 Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

Banner icon

I'm somewhat at a loss for a good image for this task force, so I've used a bust of Thucydides () for the time being. If anyone has any better ideas, please feel free to change it. Kirill Lokshin 01:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Scope

From my post at Military Science tf: "I think of technology and engineering as physical manifestation (all articles referring to tangible items and places), this task force as technique, theory and development (those articles which refer to most intangibles, substance of history and new classes of tangibles), and the historiography group as military journalism and controversy (article about recording history and meta history, humanizing, and noting anomaly, all tangible or no)." Discussion, disagreement, drawn blades? BusterD 01:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Replied here to avoid fragmenting the discussion over three pages. Kirill Lokshin 01:41, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Peer review request for Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships

There's a new peer review request for Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 17:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Blunders, mistakes and human factors

I've always had an interest in military SNAFUs, and I'd like to do an article series on them.¹ One article would be about occurrences in combat where human decisions lead to needlessly avoidable defeat and/or loss. Flight 19, Battle of the River Plate, and the 507th Maintenance Company's wrong turn toward Nasiriyah in 2003 would be some examples. The second would be about combat command generals/admirals, MacArthur's misperception of China's reaction to his drive toward the Yalu River or LBJ's irrational meddling with Air Force/Navy/Marine flight operations during the Vietnam War. The last would be about snafus in the highest levels, for instance the office war about the M2 Bradley. I realize these examples were for the most part American examples, they are merely what I could remember off the top of my head and I'm interested in the screw ups of all militaries. (¹I need to be clear I'm not saying the articles need to have SNAFU in the name, human factors or issues would be better.) Anynobody 22:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Peer review request for John Watts de Peyster

There's a new peer review request for John Watts de Peyster that may be of interest to you; any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! Kirill 03:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Peer review for Military Revolution now open

The peer review for Military Revolution is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill 17:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Conflicts, battles and military exercises" articles and just reviewed Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues considering sourcing that should be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I am leaving this message at this task force, along with the other relevant task forces to the article, since the article falls under this topic and figured you might be interested in helping to improve the article further. The article needs some more inline citations, an expanded lead, and uniform inline citation formatting. If added, I'll pass the article. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page, and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 00:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

New article stub Military historiography created

Please expand. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Arthur Bryant

The article on the above subject was recently called to my attention on the basis of the numerous quotations included, and whether those quotations violated neutrality. I have subsequently added a bit more biographical information to the article. I would however welcome any input on whether the existing quotations, included in the "Controversy" section, might be receiving undue weight. Anyone interested is encouraged in responding at Talk:Arthur Bryant#POV. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 18:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)