Talk:Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System

Wikify
This article is difficult to wikify since little exists on wikipedia related to the defense acquisition process. Any help would be appreciated, since I looked at the article and didn't see much more to internally link. 69.143.38.167 00:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)


 * 69.143 -- I'll make a bit better with a couple at see Also to KPP and MNS. That currently has a second issue, that it unimformative list of non-link index numbers without any title or context. -- just a meaningless index number.  I think those should be moved into text content if they're to be text or imporved to a link, or simply removed ... but will leave as is for now.  Markbassett (talk) 13:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

In the Methodology section, material probably should be materiel. That's how the military refers to ammo, weapons, and equipment that supports warfighting capability.

your should also spell out JPD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.178.58 (talk) 12:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I fixed the spelling/term issue of materiel (supplies and equipment) vs material (substance thing made of) and found it on a couple other pages. Markbassett (talk) 13:37, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Why little related to defense acquisition
Maybe folks can offer thoughts to improve things, because the reasons why (above) mentioned little related to defense acquisition seem to include WP nature and other topics or specialized fields, and at the least would be good to evolve where the JCIDS tree of articles should go.:


 * DoD changes terms - WP is just getting an article on ABC when DoD changes to BCD. While the two may be close, they are not close enough for a redirect so a term-specific article depends on how long the term is stable.


 * Deletionists and pop culture - saw that one See Also here was deleted. The deletion of RiskAoA was criticized on variety of things, seems deletionist by perfectionists and for not being widely covered failing notability.  Seems odd that how trillions in spending happens isn't covered and the latest in celebrity tidbits or sports is, but that is how WP:Notability and press coverage go.  (Also, what is in open media about acquisition tends to posturing not information-content useful for an article.)  Other items deleted include the See Also listing "* DODD 5000.1, DODI 5000.2, DODD 4630.5 and DODI 4630.8" and "* CJCSI 3170.01G and CJCSI 6212.01E", "* IT Acquisition Advisory Council www.IT-AAC.org", and "* Interoperability Clearinghouse www.ICHnet.org" ...


 * Lacks advocacy group - other things seem to not be required to pass notability because there is a WP advocacy for them that counters deletionists within WP. There are apparently comprehensive entry of catalogs for biology (every variation of Marigold] or oddballs like Marrus orthocanna) and of astronomy (Gliese 163, 243 Ida), with Lists and Categories and on and on.  Such areas seem due to there is a WP Project group that overrides any deletionists, plus they have a catalog easily pilfered from.


 * Better done by Google - some topics are better found with google than WP (and some better with neither) and this seems one of those.


 * DoD references sites exist - there's already dtic.mil, acqnotes.com, everyspec.com, dau.mil, NPS, .... they have more current, authoritative, and detailed data so there's not as much need from that community to put anything into WP when they have to use the DAP.

RSVP with any ideas, Markbassett (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joint Capabilities Integration Development System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070204073933/http://www.dtic.mil/cjcs_directives/cdata/unlimit/3170_01.pdf to http://www.dtic.mil/cjcs_directives/cdata/unlimit/3170_01.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)