Template talk:Did you know/3rd Battalion, 10th Aviation Regiment (United States)

3rd Battalion, 10th Aviation Regiment (United States)

 * ... that the 3rd Battalion, 10th Aviation Regiment deployed three times in support of the ongoing Global War on Terrorism?
 * Comment: I reviewed this article through AfC. --Nathan2055talk-review 16:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Created by 75.73.145.219 (talk). Nominated by Nathan2055 (talk) at 15:59, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Length:Symbol confirmed.svg Calmer   Waters  06:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sourcing (V, RS, BLP):Symbol possible vote.svg Under the Operational History section, the information is cited to ref 4, which states none of the preceding information given. Calmer   Waters  06:35, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Plagiarism/close paraphrasing:Symbol possible vote.svg Looking over the first section Formation, it is directly taken word for word from http://www.history.army.mil/html/forcestruc/lineages/branches/av/010av003bn.htm. Through this is a US government website and therefor PD, the lack of rewriting the text into the author's own words IMO would not make it ready for main page introduction.  Calmer   Waters  06:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Copyvio:
 * Obvious faults in prose, structure, formatting:Symbol possible vote.svg The article is in need copy editing and addressing of the inline referencing. Calmer   Waters  06:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments/discussion:  Does not currently pass DYK rules. Needs to be correctly cited, referenced, and copy edited. Calmer  Waters  06:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't see the problem in Formation. It's rewritten in the editor's own words. The problem with references is solved (I added a new reference and removed a reference to another Wikipedia page. I copy edited the article, but I really didn't see any problems. Resubmitting DYK nomination. --Nathan2055talk-review 16:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I will give two examples of the very close paraphrasing that I noticed in the formation section to show you what I mean. This source; however, was an US MIL website that is released under PD and therefore not a CV. Its just that probable copy-paste, cut and move words within the sentences around, concerns me and makes me wonder if all the sourced material was added this way. two examples.


 * Article 3rd Battalion, 10th Aviation Regiment was constituted in the Regular Army as Company C, 10th Aviation Regiment on 17 April 1986. It was first assigned to the 1st Armored Division in Germany.


 * Source Constituted 17 April 1986 in the Regular Army as Company C, 10th Aviation Battalion, an element of the 1st Armored Division, and activated in Germany


 * Article On 16 September 2005, the unit was reorganized and re-designated Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 3rd Battalion, 10th Aviation Regiment, with its organic elements concurrently constituted and activated.


 * Source Reorganized and redesignated 16 September 2005 as Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3d Battalion, 10th Aviation (organic elements concurrently constituted and activated)


 * I do understand that in the incorporating of a list such as that, most if not all the information will make its way into the article, but things like organic elements concurrently constituted and activated also? I do see you have spent some time ce the article and will take another look. Calmer   Waters  04:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem. It appears to be rewritten in the author's own words as best as possible. I'd be looking at this in a different way if it was copyrighted but the fact that it is public domain... I think it's fine. --Nathan2055talk-review 16:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll attempt to find some sources for the section and hook. I had to remove two because one was for the whole of the 10th, not the 3-10 and did not support any of the history in the section, and one was just not helpful in the context of the sentence as it only stated it redeployed from OIF, nothing of where to. Not trying to be difficult, but these are things that sometimes arise when working with someone's creation that did not properly cite the material given. Calmer   Waters  03:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I have been looking for sources off and on for the last couple of days and still fail to find any that specially state the deployments for the war on terror. Looking at some of the list of KIA soldiers, I can find some that are listed as 3rd BN 10th Aviation, but have yet to find the deployments for this unit. The problem with writing about units below the brigade or division level is that most of the information is usually referenced to the higher units. This is two levels below brigade and just one level above a single company which many at this level are just included into the parent article unless they have done something histrionically significant as a unit (see WikiProject_Military_history/Notability_guide. If you can find a source that proves the hook, then I suppose this can get checked off, as of now it is lacking. Calmer   Waters  04:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, how about a new hook: It's sourced to http://www.history.army.mil/html/forcestruc/lineages/branches/av/010av003bn.htm (source three). Thanks, Nathan2055talk-review 17:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ALT1 ... that the 3rd Battalion, 10th Aviation Regiment received the Valorous Unit Award, the second highest decoration a unit can receive, twice?
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Date, length, ALT1 hook verified. Prior concerns regarding copy-editing and sourcing addressed. Nomination's good to go. Calmer   Waters  05:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * When will the nomination be sent to the queue? --Nathan2055talk-review 20:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Depends on the editor that prepares the queues along with topic balancing, older nominations, and such. Would just keep an eye on the nomination for time to time. Kindly  Calmer   Waters  21:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Returned to T:TDYK per this thread. Gatoclass (talk) 06:11, 20 August 2011 (UTC)