Talk:Australian Air Force Cadets/Archive 1

Archive 1

To much detail

Is it really necessary to include the what quantities of uniforms and what is issued? this is meant to be an encyclopedic entry about the Australian Air Force Cadets not an exhaustive kit list.--Pandaplodder (talk) 10:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

No indeed not necessary this information changes constantly and is available in the resources

References and pictures

This article is really badly referenced, if its not cleaned up up then it will be tagged. Alos it is in dire need of some decent photos, I have seen some on Flickr from ANZAC day but not sure about whether they can be used because of copyright. --Pandaplodder (talk) 16:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The ANZAC images should be removed as I believe it is not permitted to use pictures of uniformed members of the AAFC without specific prior permission. (Presumably from Public Relations - AAFC) --Wanders1 (talk) 05:34, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The Ensign used should include the AAFC Joey (marsupial) in the circle with the 'roo.--Iamcon (talk) 11:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no reference to such a flag anywhere on the net let alone pictures of it, if it does exist then it would be one for the Wikipedia Flags project, would be interested to see it Pandaplodder (talk) 08:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Just come across this: http://7wingshop.aafc.org.au/node/35 which clearly shows the RAAF ensign is being worn by cadets, think on this basis the RAAF Ensign can stay Pandaplodder (talk) 08:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The RAAF Ensign should not be used as the AAFC is not a RAAF unit, notwithstanding the Director-General is a RAAF Officer. Instead the AAFC Crest/Badge should be used as this is the identifying image of the AAFC Callanecc (talk) 12:39, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

The AAFC does use the RAAF ensign though, so.. FlightJeremy (talk) 04:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

You do realise that conversation ended over 12 years ago right? And they were talking about removing the RAAF ensign from the page. Master1701 (talk) 04:27, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

she'll be right FlightJeremy (talk) 07:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Out of date notice

Chris.120, looking at the history, I assume you marked this article as needing to be updated because of the "joining age" error. I am removing the template; but if you still think it needs updating could you please be more specific about what is incorrect in the article.

Vyasa 04:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Joining age

I now have confirmation that the enlistment age has been changed to 13. Updating page accordingly. Vyasa 03:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Hector will not let staff enroll cadets under the age of 13.--Ryan the leach 05:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

There has been a lot of debate about the joining age on this article - some time ago I found it stated 13. This was inconsistant with anything I had ever heard - and CadetNet lists the age as 12.5

The age in question has been changed on this article repeatedly. Could someone please confirm the correct joining age so this can be resolved once and for all?

Vyasa 12:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Although CadetNet lists the age as 12.5, if one should continue the link to the AAFC page, they will find the age listed as 13. However, the Army takes recruits at an age of 12.5, so this may be the case. Lawnmowers Rock! 10:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The official age is 13, however cadets can join during a recruiting drive if they are a few months off, as they can still be considered apart of the 'recruit' rank, an unofficial rank, in which cadets have the option of 'trying' the organisation out before they commit. not all squadrons do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.110.158.115 (talk) 12:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

National Strength

I don't know how to change it but if if I need to, but the National strength numbers in the side box were of April 2005.

Establishments updated in infobox from AAFC Standing Orders; Issue 2/2010, 01 Apr 10. Callanecc (talk) 13:42, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

seperate squadron information

Just some ideas: The wings could be linked to articles about each seperate wing. that allows squadrons to post information about seperate squadrons under headings in each wing article. --Iamcon (talk) 10:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Squadrons have strict rules on what they can and can't post in public. On the List of Australian Air Force Cadet units article, there is an opportunity for squadrons to either create an article devoted to the squadron or to add a small amount information (using a dot point) about the squadron. Callanecc (talk) 09:13, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Military Info Box

I have changed the heading infobox to the corret MilInfobox, although I cannot find the correct lables to put all the information in, if someone can have a go at that, the AAFC box is not a a wiki standard info box and is a bit shabby so needed changing (reproduced below).--Pandaplodder (talk) 11:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The other box seems better, though the title of the commander is listed incorrectly and should be CDR-AAFC

If anybody replies or posts something on the talk page please can they sign their comment as per wiki practice, thanks Pandaplodder (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I have changed the infobox again, this has been standardised like the ATC(UK) andRoyal Canadian Air Cadets (RCAC)* entries, the ensign used is the RAAF one, if there is a cadet version then it needs to be loaded on Wikipedia commons so it can be used here, the crest has been moved down into the gallery. The RCAC article managed to get a Good Article classification, have a look at it for tips on how to improve this one Pandaplodder (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

What is the feeling about deleteing the infobox in the "see also" section as it's only use is for links to internal articles, which could be displayed in the "see also" section in a dot point format? I will delete the box (and move the references over) in 7 days if there are no objections. Callanecc (talk) 11:35, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

The infobox wasn't created by me just moved as it didn't fit the "globally standard mil info box" so can be deleted as far as I'm concerned Pandaplodder (talk) 16:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Second infobox (see right) removed and links added to "see also" section Callanecc (talk) 11:55, 25 February 2011 (UTC)