Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region

Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region
I've been writing this for the past month and a half and researching it even longer. I think I've reached the end of what I can do with it without outside suggestions, so I'm looking for fresh eyes to tell me what else needs to be done with it so I can get it up to snuff. I welcome all suggestions. Many thanks! ScreaminEagle 20:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
Very nice article! Some (fairly general) suggestions: Overall, though, this looks quite decent, considering that the recent nature of the JFHQ-NCR makes for a lack of historical narrative. Kirill Lokshin 02:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe add Infobox Military Unit? It's not exactly designed for this sort of thing, but I think it would fit pretty well.
 * Trim the contact information; we're not really supposed to be writing a phonebook here, and it's easily found on the group's own site anyways.
 * The second half of the article is mostly lists of links to other units. It might be worthwhile to expand this somewhat by describing what (at least some of) the groups mentioned do in the context of the JFHQ-NCR, since it's not at all obvious for some of them.
 * Has there been any media coverage of this? (Probably politicized, if any, but it might help pad out the article.)


 * Kirill, thanks for looking this over! I have a few questions, though. First off, thanks for the Unit Box suggestion--I was unsure which would be best to use and that helped.  I have one concern with it though, and that's the seal/logo picture with it.  I used the 300x as directed, but it made the logo huge and terribly pixelated. 210x corrected the problem, but I don't know if it's OK to use that or not.  Please advise.


 * Also, I worried about the plethora of lists, too. For further clarification, do you recommend writing paragraphs talking about how these units participate together and what they have to offer JFHQ, or did you mean writing a small 1-2 sentence snippet next to several/all of the bulletted points?  Also, would it be better to cut out the military installations section and fit those pieces into the other military unit sections?  Or leave it as is?


 * As for media coverage, yes there has been a little coverage. The problem is most of it (almost all of it is documented at the end of the article) comes from JFHQ's public affairs office, or their people writing specials for other military papers, tooting its own horn.  It seems that few people really know JFHQ exists, let alone what it does except JFHQ/MDW itself and a few of the partners it works with (hence, why I wrote the article in the first place).  Most of the media/public take JFHQ's security for granted--not really questioning where it comes from--and that's my problem.  Your comments did remind me of one situation when it actually got a little press coverage in providing security for the Army's 21st 10-Miler that was turned into a "Fun Run" due to a bomb package scare.  So I will add that in certainly, but even then the best coverage was put out by JFHQ's P.A. office itself (Tom Mani, yet again).  What can I say?  Should I just expound on what they did for each of the events that they took part in, even though they didn't get a lot of attention out of it?  Or will that be overkill?  ScreaminEagIe 20:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Some responses:
 * Yes, any size for the logo is fine; the 300px is just the maximum that should be used.
 * The best option would be to turn the lists completely into paragraph form, but if there's not enough material for that, snippets can be used too.
 * As a general rule, more information is better; if the article gets too long, we can always trim it later. Some description of the JFHQ's actual role in various events would probably be quite interesting to the reader; the fact that there hasn't been a lot of attention shouldn't be a problem so long as there are sources (however few in number) that can be cited.
 * Hope that helps! Kirill Lokshin 21:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)