Talk:100th Jäger Division (Wehrmacht)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 100th Jäger Division (Wehrmacht) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: European / German / World War II

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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War II task force

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as stub --dashiellx (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That word

I know this article is about a division, but I do think the word 'division' crops up with depressing frequency (seven times in the introduction alone) and numerous times throughout the article itself. This might mean it has to be re-written.

What do other editors think?

RASAM (talk) 16:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]