Talk:Asymmetric Warfare Group

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Asymmetric Warfare Group article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Squadron designation[edit]

If someone is wondering what the sources for the squadron designations are, here they are:

Able Squadron ([1])
Baker Squadron ([2])
Charlie Squadron ([3])
Dog Squadron ([4])

For the overall organization of the unit, check this: [5], minute 00:49. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.221.180.134 (talk) 19:51, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then put the references in the article yourself. Why on earth would you revert over and over, with no sources, then bring the sources to the talk page? If you don't know how to do it, ask someone instead of restoring unsourced material over and over. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio[edit]

Moved from (my tp)

Copyvio tag @ Asymmetric Warfare Group

I ran it through the copyvio detector, and it looks like mostly reverse mirrors came up. Where do you think that the article copied from? I intend to fix it and would like some more information. Thanks in advance! Sennecaster (What now?) 00:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I tagged it because the sentence immediately preceding was an exact match word-for-word for several other sites, but thinking they were mostly/likely mirrors, used that particular tag to get a second opinion. - wolf 01:26, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point, the amount of mirroring that happens nowadays means almost everything recent is one. I threw it through the copyvio detector anyways and it is all mirrors and spam SEOs. Thanks for checking! :) I'll be removing the tag if you haven't already. Sennecaster (What now?) 01:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]