Talk:Combined operations

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Denmark#Viking Age|coastal]] The anchor (#Viking Age) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Combined vs Joint[edit]

Contrary to the into "combined operations" is frequently used to describe operations involving different branches of a single country's military. This article itself gives examples of such operations.--Mongreilf (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

Combined is used to describe two nations working together, like USA and England. Joint is used to describe two branches working together, like the army and the navy.

The article is wrong.

Source: I'm an officer in the army, also google.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.87.143 (talk) 13:40, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the article, but english isn't my first language so someone should probably clear up the grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.87.143 (talk) 13:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Combined operations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080510012814/http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.3655 to http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.3655

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:50, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]