Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Opportunities for new military history articles



A common explanation for the decreasing number of new articles being created is that most of the obvious topics have now been taken. While it is certainly true that articles on all the major military history topics have been started (in most cases several years ago), that doesn't mean that there is no further opportunity for article creation. The following essay outlines various experiences in finding new topics for military history articles, and areas where fairly easy opportunities for article creation remain.

Article worthiness
The main determinant of whether something is "article worthy" is if it meets the criteria set out in the guideline Notability and the various subsidiary guidelines (of which Notability (people) and Notability (organizations and companies) are most relevant for military history topics). In short, these guidelines require the existence of "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources" before an article can be created and for the topic to not violate any of the categories at WP:NOT. However, there are no hard and fast rules of what "significant coverage" means, and the general inclination of most editors participating in article for deletion discussions is to err on the side of keeping the article if it is sourced, neutral and written on a fairly sensible topic. As a result, there's plenty of leeway to create articles on interesting topics.

General guidance on indicators of notability for military history-related topics is available at WikiProject Military history/Notability guide. Here are a few points to check the minimum level of sourcing that is required to support an article:
 * Several pages on the topic in more than one book (the number of pages needed to support a good-quality article can be surprisingly small if the density of the information is high).
 * An article focused on the topic in an academic journal or good-quality magazine.
 * Several non-related news stories in different major media outlets about a person, organisation or event over time.

Current gaps
Taking the above into account, what opportunities exist for new articles? Here are some suggestions:
 * Under-represented topics – We have surprisingly few articles on many important topics. For example, there are few articles on "women in military" and there is no doubt that the distribution of articles in the English-language Wikipedia is slanted towards topics which have involved English-speaking people (for instance, the coverage of ships and notable military units from non-English speaking countries is patchy).
 * Thematic topics – Wikipedia still has few cross-cutting articles that discuss a particular theme rather than a specific event or thing. Articles such as Horses in World War I and Battleships in World War II show just how much potential there is.
 * The evolution of things – Structural history of the Roman military is an excellent example of an article tracing how something changed over time. Similar articles could be developed for many long-standing military organisations and there is a scope for large literature on this topic.
 * Sub-articles – While these are generally split from larger articles to provide more detailed coverage, they offer an interesting opportunity for new articles. Early life and military career of John McCain and Wehrmacht forces for the Ardennes Offensive are good examples of articles on an important part of a larger topic. There's also lots of scope to create articles on notable variants of various important weapons systems – General Dynamics/Grumman F-111B is an example.
 * Articles on forgotten topics – Wikipedia provides a good opportunity to highlight topics which have historically been under-emphasised. For example, most accounts of the Pacific War emphasise the ferocity of the combat, where a few Japanese soldiers surrendered. Further research, however, shows that as many as 50,000 surrendered during the war. This led to one editor creating the Japanese prisoners of war in World War II article. Most of the African civil wars of the 20th century and before are horrendously undercovered, eg First Congo War, Second Congo War.
 * Second-level battles – Sure, we've had an article on the Battle of Kursk since June 2002. However, many other significant but less important battles of the war on the Eastern Front are article-worthy thanks to the massive, and often very detailed, literature on this war. The same applies to many other wars.
 * 'Routine' battles – Many "routine" wartime events such as contested convoys and major air raids have received considerable coverage in specialised sources which can easily be used to support articles.
 * Logistics – There's a massive amount of literature on how military units have been supplied across history, but few Wikipedia articles on the topic. It would be easy to write an article on a topic such as British logistical support for the Burma campaign, for instance, and these are topics of genuine importance.
 * Military exercises and operations not involving combat – For obvious reasons these are often covered in detail in military journals and are important topics. Landing on Emirau is a very good example of a high-quality article on a major military operation which involved almost no combat.
 * Military historians and books – There's a large and interesting body of literature on military historiography and many military history books are extensively reviewed in major newspapers and academic journals (thereby meeting the requirements of WP:NBOOK), yet there aren't many articles on these topics.
 * Missing major topics – Yes they still do exist. For instance, coverage of the battles fought in the last 12 months of the Pacific War is surprisingly limited.

Strategies for finding new topics
Some strategies which have been used by experienced editors to find new article topics are:
 * Read detailed accounts of topics and specialised military publications – These often provide enough detail on lesser-known topics to support an article. Official histories and the professional journals most Western militaries now publicly publish are particularly useful in this regard.
 * Look for red links – While not as common as they used to be, there are still lots of red links around.
 * Follow up on to-do lists – Many Wikiprojects and some Military History project task forces have central "to-do" lists; WikiProject Military history/Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force is one example. Other lists of missing topics can be found here (women-related) and here (generic request list)
 * Photos – If you see a bit of military hardware drive, fly or sail past, or walk by a military installation, take its photo (if it is legal to do so) and then find out what it is and if there's an article on it. If there isn't an article and the topic is notable, the photo will give you a head start with creating an interesting article. Museums and exhibitions are a great source of photogenic material (one tip is to photograph the item of interest and then the item's display/information card as well – it makes identifying and researching the subject much easier).
 * Personal interest – Think of any questions you'd like answered, and see if Wikipedia has an article which provides the answer. If not, you can research the topic and start the article.
 * Other Language Wikis – If you can read another language well enough, browse that respective wiki for articles that aren't here. While an article's existence on a different language wiki doesn't automatically make the topic notable, it is a great place to start, find sources, and find a niche of under-represented topics.