Talk:Generations of warfare

Military history: Technology Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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

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

United States Unassessed

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

5th-generation warfare

I've copied the following comment from my talk page to here, since it involves the article, and not just me. It follows this addition to the article and my revert with edit summary of Rv "5th Gen"; source?. --A D Monroe III^(talk) 14:48, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have the references for Fifth-Generation Warfare in 6 months (I'm actually writing a thoroughly-documented book about it). In the meantime I'll refrain from editing that page. Thanks for your guidance! Kashifv (talk) 06:43, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that Wikipedia has limits on what can be used as reliable sources. A newly published book by an otherwise unknown author may not qualify. --A D Monroe III^(talk) 17:37, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a couple of issues with this Fifth-Generation Warfare. This term is from 2009. One source is from 2009 and one is from 2010 and one is from 2019 ( made by not some expert or specialist or so, in that topic). After 10/11 years that term is coined I don't see to this got "wide" acceptance in scholar works, academic sources etc also about support or by criticsm. Also there is something called "fourth gen. warfare" and even that term is under criticism but there is many works and sources about that. If after 10 or 11 years this term did not get some wide attention it should be removed totally or put with a few sentences as a note under the fourth generation warfare to some authors claim to there is that term, but even from sources I saw to exsitance of it is doubtful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.184.162 (talk) 00:40, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are some new sources since July:

-219.88.235.157 (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think, some theory to become accepted and included here, need wide but really wide acceptance by the academic community and experts in this field, (the best is by long established experts with name recognition) especially if it is a new one. And to have encyclopedic value. We don't promote original works or new concepts, no matter how some author/s wish to they get some recognition it does not work in that way by promoting it here to get some recognition. Nubia86 (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Russo-Ukrainian War

Which generation of warfare is this? TheBrodsterBoy (talk) 00:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]