Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Able Archer 83

Able Archer 83
I do believe that this article meets all exist prerequists for FA status, as was noted on the Military History talk page. Therefore, I have decided to place it here to see if the article has what it takes to become featured. TomStar81 08:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Nominator's Note I enrolled in Summer School this semester, so if I appear slow to respond here, have patience: it's likely that schoolwork has tied me up. TomStar81 08:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 *  Weak support.  Seems ok, but some things are a bit off. The quotes need to be formatted differently, and some of the paragraphs within the article, while not being one sentence in length, are nevertheless too short. While not enough for me to object, these things should be fixed. RyanG e rbil10 (Drop on in!) 17:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I will look into it first thing tomorrow, bu right now I have to get to work on a speach due wensday. TomStar81 02:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Noted and addressed. Is this better? TomStar81 22:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Stronger Support. Short paragraphs are still bugging me, but we're closer to a full support. RyanG e rbil10 (Drop on in!) 05:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak object. Support The ending of the article is sudden. The external links should be before the references, and there should be a see also section for other similar articles.  Perhaps a further reading section?  I made some changes to the article, including removing the sentence "It is worrying to note that the Moscow Centre briefed its agents that it was probable that a peaceful practice exercise was a cover for an actual attack." -- this is an original observation, and an inaccurate one.  It might have been correct to say "...that a peaceful practice exercies would be used as a covern for an actual attack," which is more accurate from the statement... but then it isn't as "worrying."  I found a few other instances where the text struck me as making too much of a judgement about its subject.  If the see also/further reading/external links stuff is addressed, I will support. Mango juice talk 15:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * On the References coming before the External links: Guide to layout advocates that order. It also makes more sense to me logically. Why would you like them switched? Melchoir 18:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to object on that basis alone. But for the record, I don't like that order.  There tend to be so many references in thoroughly in-line sourced articles like this that readers would tend not venture beyond that point.  I think the sections that are of interest to a casual reader should go first, and a list of more interesting things to read on the subject fits that description.  Mango juice talk 19:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * In responce to your objection I have added a "See also" section, and I have created an anylisis section to address the "sudden ending" of the article. Is this better? TomStar81 21:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I like the see also section; I would like it if the external links section was renamed "further reading" (and perhaps supplemented with some books). I would lose the analysis section; with the see also, it's no longer necessary as a cap.  It's good info, but alone at the end it seems a bit.. odd?  (Sorry if I'm being a pain here! :)  Mango juice talk 01:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok then, I renamed the external links section per your suggestion, and put the analysis info in the introduction (IMHO, it seems to fit in there well). I will work on adding book references as well. TomStar81 02:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks good now. Changed to support. Mango juice talk 20:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Question: shouldn't this article be at Exercise Able Archer (1983) or something of the sort? Or did the name actually include the "83"? Kirill Lokshin 02:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Not entirely sure. A quick search on Yahoo! seems to suggest that this goes by several names, among them Operation Able Archer, Able Archer, and Able Archer 83. From where I sit it would seem that the name "Able Archer 83" is not as popular a search as Exercise Able Archer (209,ooo to 243,000 respectively). IM(H)O it should stay where it is. TomStar81 03:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, fair enough. Minor object on two further points, though:
 * "ABLE ARCHER" should be changed to "Able Archer" throughout; Wikipedia does not follow military capitalization rules in this case.
 * The "See also" section is just poor style. The links should be worked into the text somehow and the section removed.
 * Other than that, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 03:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Both of your objections have been noted and addressed. Since Mangojuice seemed to suggest either a see also section or an anylisis section I scrapped the former and reinstated the latter. Is this better? TomStar81 04:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, support from me now. As far as "Analysis", I would rename the section to "Aftermath", which is both a more common section name and seems to better match the contents. Kirill Lokshin 04:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. TomStar81 05:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I fixed up the mistakes in the nomination text at the top. (Bold of me.) Now, this needs to be properly copy-edited; can you network on WP to find collaborators who are interested in this topic and who might lend a hand? Let's have a look at the lead.

Able Archer 83 was a NATO command post exercise (or war game) conducted between 2 November–11, 1983 that spanned the continent of Europe and simulated a coordinated nuclear release. Factors such as the deteriorated relations between the United States and Soviet Union, anticipated arrival of "super-stealth" Pershing II nuclear missiles in Europe, and the incredibly realistic nature of the exercise (which incorporated a new, unique format of coded communication, radio silences, participation by heads of state, and a simulated DEFCON 1 nuclear alert) led some in the USSR to believe Able Archer 83 to be a genuine nuclear strike.[2] In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in Eastern Germany and Poland were placed on alert.[3] This relatively obscure incident is considered by many historians to be the closest the world has come to nuclear war since the well documented Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.[4] The threat of nuclear war abruptly ended with the conclusion of the ABLE ARCHER 83 exercise on November 11."


 * If "war game" is another term for "command post exercise", remove "or" (could be ambiguous).
 * The date-range is whacky—can you find some way of autoformatting November 2nd to 11th, 1983 (or don't autoformat it).
 * "deteriorated" is awkward; it would be normal to write "deteriorating"; or use another word, such as "poor".
 * "The" before "Soviet Union", and before "anticipated".
 * "incredibly" is not encyclopedic.
 * "to believe that Archer 83 was" would be better.
 * "East Germany".
 * "well-documented" (I think—check it); but why not remove it?
 * I'd say that the threat of nuclear war ended gradually, not in 1983, but during the early 90s.
 * Why tell us twice that the exercise concluded on 11 November? Why is the title in caps at the end?

At present, I have to  object . Tony 11:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Good points. I can help out with copyediting. Let me take care of the first paragraph, and I'll see what else ought to be done. Melchoir 22:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we adressed all the issues you currently have with the introduction (Melchoir, thanks for the help). Is the introduction better now? TomStar81 02:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but what about the rest of the article? Tony 11:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll probably finish my pass through the article later today. Melchoir 19:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It's much better, so I'll withdraw my object. However, can you fix this snake, perhaps by adding some commas or rewording? "Several other indications described in the 17 February 1983 Permanent Operational Assignment to discover a nuclear attack were present during Able Archer 83, furthering the impression that the exercise might be a cover for a real attack." More commas throughout would make the reader's task easier—e.g., "Because Able Archer 83 simulated an actual release it is likely the service and technical personnel mentioned in ..." (Comma after "release"). Avoid starting a sentence with "Also". Tony 14:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. I think I've gone through the whole article now. Melchoir 03:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Support; content has always looked good, and I'm now satisfied with the writing and citations. Melchoir 06:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)