Talk:Army Combat Badge

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... the text this is 'copied' from is an Army Instruction (Army) (DI(A)), essentially identical to the two used as references for the information on this page.

A new DI(A) is signed by each new Chief of Army upon assuming that position from the previous in the Hand Over/Take Over process. For the most part, a Chief of Army tends to agree with the information provided in the previous DI(A) when establishing their own, and the text within is approved and simply retained from the previous instruction, given a new front page and signature box and signed off by the new officer, save few changes such as the addition of other sections for clarification to address new procedures or methods (such as the introduction of the new Operational Service Medal into the Australian Defence Force to replace the Australian Active Service Medal).

This page should be retained as the information inside is security level 'unclassified' (not under copyright, free for distribution once printed) and there are several documents on the same topic, with the same text, signed simply by different authorising officers (Chiefs of Service/Chief of Defence Force).--The Be-Sharps (talk) 13:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Just looked into this a bit more, and it looks fine (I'm not an expert in knowing the copyright background of Goverment works!). The reviewing admin has removed the tag, and will 'assess' the copyright issues. Mdann52 (talk) 13:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm a currently serving Defence member; the images provided on the page include my own medals and ACB. The security level of the information contained is dictated as per the top of the referenced documents - 'Uncontrolled if Printed' - which reflects that the information within is unclassified and held under no national or international copyright law or protection under the Defence Force Act 1903. Thanks for your help and cheers for your time. The Be-Sharps (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Although I largely agree with The Be-Sharps, wikipedia copyvios often lead to tedious arguments which I like to avoid. Hence, as a first pass, I have viciously pruned out anything that could even vaguely be considered a copyvio. It now being 1am here, I'm retiring. But in the fullness of time I will carefully restore those bits of The Be-Sharps contributions which are not copyvios, and carefully modify those bits which might cause problems. In the meantime, thanks to both of you for not descending into WW3! Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)