User talk:ColonelVonMilky

Welcome!

Hello, ColonelVonMilky, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Anotherclown (talk) 07:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Battle of Route Bismarck
If you are going to edit this article please ensure that you add reliable sources in the form of inline citations to back up your edits. Simply adding the information and reverting when it is challenged and removed is unhelpful and may constitute disruptive editing. By all means I hope you continue to contribute to this article, but please do so constructively. If you have any questions about how to edit please ask. Thank you. Anotherclown (talk) 07:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * There are absolutely no citations for this article what so ever. I don't understand how one not cited comment is more relevant to the other. The fact is a lot of the statements in this are hyperbole and grossly exaggerated. The tone is narrative in nature and not factual "greatly exposing himself to RPG fire", "a fierce 20 minute fight", "heavy weight of rpg fire". Need I go on. The fact is this entire article is written in such a way to make this a much bigger incident than it ever was. I still argue the point that this shouldn't be referred to as a battle. And I dare anyone to find any quote which states that OBG(W)-2 cause 30 casualties. That statement has never EVER been brought up by anyone. 3 is the possible figure I have ever heard from proper sources.


 * These are all (mostly) valid points, perhaps you might consider re-writing it to be more accurate? Even if that means chopping it down to just a stub, as long as it is cited that would be acceptable IMO. That said if there are no sources available perhaps it doesn't meet wikipedias notability guidelines and maybe taking the article to AfD is required (as you said maybe it shouldn't be called a battle at all?). Personnally I have been trying to encourage editors to add reliable sources and citations to the article but it seems to be an uphill battle (it is pretty much completely unsourced as you say). Anotherclown (talk) 06:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I think the difficulty in getting citations for this event is that the only 2 I know of, less official documents, is a short article in the Australian news papers which simply detailed the IED incident that hit the OC of the cavalary troop. And the short citation out of the latest history of the Royal Australian REgiment stating who the infantry OC was.

Apart from that the only things left on this are eye witness accounts. How do you get citation for that?


 * An understandable problem, and one that will no doubt continue to be a problem for some time with many of the more recent Australian actions in Iraq and Afghanistan (at least until someone writes a book). Ultimately that is why I suggest chopping the article down to a stub to include only what can be referenced using reliable sources. Please also remember to sign your posts by typing ~ at the end. I hope this helps. Anotherclown (talk) 13:24, 12 November 2010 (UTC)