User:ASUBSlim/sandbox

Copedits suggest that a bulk of the work is a direct copy and paste. Upon following the link it is clear that quite a bit of this page is word for word copied from this page. The language is not clear to readers. "The 1st Cavalry was flagged" has no clear explanation of what flagged means. Was the unit activated for the first? Was it reactivated or reassigned? Does that mean they were assigned a mission? "That was my unit" is an unnecessary line in the text. It adds nothing to the article but grounds for bias. It appears to me that much of the information is in dispute and unsubstantiated by any notable source. Some of the edits were able to suggests revisions that can be backed by a single source. This is an article that I would recommend for deletion.

High points for this article are the fact that it doesn't appear to be attempting to sway a reader in any particular direction or opinion. The language used is very informal. There are so many acronyms used that even I, a former military member, had trouble following them. The limited references sited are good sources but there are too few.