Talk:British Army Training Unit Suffield

Remoteness
Removed the words "remote" and "uninhabited" that were used in describing the base. While the base is certainly large, I am from the area and it is far from being "remote" and the surrounding prairie is certainly inhabited. The previous version gave the impression that the base is some isolated outpost in the depths of the Canadian wilderness, which is far from the truth. It is located adjacent to the most heavily travelled highway in Canada, just north of Medicine Hat and about a 2 hour drive from Calgary a city of ~a million people. Also changed around the first sentence to make it clear that the BATU is a British Unit located at CFB Suffield, the previous version made it sound as though BATU was a British owned base. mhunter 06:59, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I suspect BATUS seems remote and uninhabited from the point of view of a British soldier used to London or Liverpool! PeteVerdon 16:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'll give you that one :) mhunter 07:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Remote yes, but not "uninhabited". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.212.165 (talk) 06:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Assessment
Overall, acceptable, C-Class. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 20:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * B1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. X mark.svg Fails Not enough secondary sources, and there's only 2 anyway so that can be improved.
 * B2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. Yes check.svg Passes Does not seem to omit anything crucial
 * B3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. Yes check.svg Passes
 * B4. It is free from major grammatical errors. Yes check.svg Passes
 * B5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. Yes check.svg Passes