Talk:Military Auxiliary Radio System

American bias
It should be mentioned that this is an american program. They do not hold a monopoly on all thing military.--Madison Gray 16:29, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it's pretty obvious from the article that this is a program of the United States military. It's unclear what the objection is about.--Kharker (talk) 16:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Promotional Tone (Newsrelease)
I'm concerned about the tone of the article. It comes across as promotional, almost like a press release. Phrases like: Should be replaced by objective measures of success or activity to make the article more neutral. twilsonb (talk) 00:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "The Military Affiliate Radio System is just as active today as it ever was"
 * "MARS continues to be very active today"
 * "Their efforts were very successful"

Redundant navbox
Since everything in is included in, shouldn't  be removed? --K6PDG Patrick (talk) 21:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

AARS Misinformation
The MARS community has had the unfortunate tendency to promulgate the understanding that the AARS was a group of radio amateurs that trained the US Army Signal Corps in the use of radios. This is absolutely wrong. Please see the following monograph for an in depth history of the AARS: Army Amateur Radio System: 1925-1941. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AARS.history (talk • contribs) 19:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC) AARS was not used as recreational organization for either civilians or the Army. It had a domestic purpose to aid in civil disaster issues as well as serve as a trained pool of operators to draw from in the event of war.