Talk:Indian Armed Forces Tri-Service Commands

Parent article
The parent article of this page is one of the following: DTM (talk) 11:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Jointness in India's military
 * Jointness in Indian Armed Forces
 * Jointness in India's security apparatus
 * Jointness and integration in India's military
 * Jointness and integration in the Indian Armed Forces
 * etc

Please see and edit if needed
The article is in its beginning stages. Please see and make changes or suggestions if needed. Thank you. Tagging SshibumXZ, Mahusha, Sarvatra, Zwerubae, Adamgerber80, Hemant Dabral, Aumnamahashiva (if anyone else could help out with this page in any way please tag them too thanks!) DTM (talk) 14:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
 * cc . —Sarvatra (talk, contribs) 15:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

title
is 'jointness' a suitable word? what about "inter-service cooperation" GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:10, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Jointness is a suitable word, as per the references used, and accordingly the scope of the article.
 * Take for example usage of the word "Jointness" in the reference "Joint Doctrine: Indian Armed Forces". There is an entire section called "SECTION I - UNDERSTANDING INTEGRATION AND JOINTNESS" (pg.39). The word is used 14 times in the document.
 * Other references in the article with jointness in the title itself: "Enhancing Jointness in Indian Armed Forces: Case for Unified Commands", "Jointness in India’s Military —What it is and What it Must Be" etc
 * If somehow 'joint' (from joint warfare) could be placed in the title instead of 'jointness', maybe it would sound better. But cooperation is not a substitute for the word in the context of the article or the references mentioned above. I have used 'inter services cooperation' for the DYK hook as per the quote and the time period of war it references, 1971; as a precursor to the modern usage, and accordingly its placement is in the beginning of the history section. While upfront "inter-service cooperation" my be easier for the general public to understand, don't you think that the phrase does not cover the scope that the article currently aims to cover? DTM (talk) 10:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually, inter-service cooperation is a hot contender for the title. As for now I will include it clearly into the lead, also as per suggestion of dyk nom DTM (talk) 09:21, 19 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I've got three variations of the word now - joint, jointness and jointmanship. DTM (talk) 09:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)