Talk:Battle honours of the Royal Australian Navy

Suggestions and questions for improvement
A few suggestions/questions for this list: Thoughts? -- saberwyn 11:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) The honours should be condensed down to the full date range to avoid duplication. From the look of the RAN's battle honour board (not 100% certain if this is an actual object... I've only seen a full-size poster, which has in turn been reproduced in the 100 Years of the Royal Australian Navy anniversary book ), the RAN itself appears to carry the full date range on each of its honours. While individual ships only receive the relevant date range for their service, it is in effect the same battle honour. To avoid confusion, there could be a note in the lead to the effect of "While any ship participating would be granted the honour, for campaigns stretching over multiple years, ships would only be credited with the years that the ship was involved directly." (yes, I know it needs work :P ).
 * 2) Instead of linking the relevant event in the battle honour name, have the event separate, so its clearer to the non-expert what is going on. Maybe even a one-line description?
 * 3) In the abovementioned poster/book, the board itself and its containing section are both headed "Campaign and Battle Honours". Should this be changed to match?