Talk:Defense Acquisition University

Good Article Candidate
Could someone please review the article for GA status. Feel free to make minor copy edits to the article.Huskers110110 (talk) 19:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I suggest you withdraw the request for reviews.=. Thisarticle is so promotional that I am considering it for deletion. Look, for example, at adjectives in the lede section explaining how important its work is. We don't do that.


 * Based on other contributions, I think theres a good chance of copyvio also.  DGG ( talk ) 17:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * DGG An interesting situation, and an interesting (presumably notable topic). So User:Huskers110110 has only edited Virginia educational articles and all with overuse of primaries (possibly exclusive use), and has GA nommed this and another. I'm ignorant of User:Mojo Hand's grounds for graceful suppression of their own maintenance tag due to the pending GA review. While wallowing in that ignorance, I restored it, and added a couple more. From what I can work out about GA review this is an instant fail article, so suggest WP:SNOW ignore it, and proceed to an obvious suggestion (to me) Draft/Userify it It feels a conflicted situation that it's a longstanding and interesting article, but hampered by a promo WP:BOGOF-like choice. Draft seems a good compromise here to put the burden back on the promo editors rather than burdening the rest of us. Widefox ; talk 01:29, 3 November 2015 (UTC) Seems appropriate to take to AfD for wider opinions.  Widefox ; talk 01:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I didn't want to stamp the article with a scarlet letter pending a GAR, anticipating that the issues would be addressed during the review, one way or another. However, it now looks very unlikely that the article is going to get improved to GA standards at this time, so I support adding the templates.-- Mojo Hand (talk) 04:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Myself, I posted what I did here to prevent a GA designation if possible, without needing to figure out how the formal process works--I've never participated in it. There have been previous examples of promotional articles nominated for GA. There was recently one that did attain GA, and was challenged, and I commented similarly supporting the challenge, and I think it was delisted.


 * I do not know if the editor involved ad a paid coi--it could quite possibly be the work of an enthusiastic student of alumnus writing articles on the basis of the school's web pages. I have over the years had definite knowledge (from their own statements) that some university's pages, and pages on their professors, were written by press agents. College press agents have a characteristic style, as do press agents in other specialties --for example, physicians and hospitals. I don't want to go into the details here, but I can explain what I look for off wiki.  And of course those copying or imitating their work share that style.


 * As for this article, I so far have not found enough copyvio from any one single place. How to handle it is best decided at the afd, not here.  I doagree that this is I think a unique institution--though there may be others similarly attuned to government needs. A decent article would be desirable. I don't want to over-emphasise this particular articles--there are dozens very much like it that need to be worked on.  DGG ( talk ) 05:43, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Defense Acquisition Guide into Defense Acquisition University
This is a DAU publication - not notable on its own merits Rogermx (talk) 18:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

The Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) - retired, update references
As per topic, the section about DAG needs to be updated.

From DAU website: "The Defense Acquisition Guidebook has been retired and replaced by a modern set of guidebooks aligned with our new acquisition policies. Identified below are twelve different functional areas fundamental to the operation of the defense acquisition process. Click on them to access specific guidebooks and where available, additional relevant reference materials."

Source 155.4.133.73 (talk) 14:16, 18 August 2023 (UTC)