Talk:15th Infantry Regiment (United States)

Military history: North America / United States

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:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Tambayan Philippines Low‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines 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.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Suggestions for improvement[edit]

This article has lots of good information, however, I would like to make the following suggestions for improvement:

Introduction - the intro could be expanded to summarise the article more clearly;
Structure - the article could be improved with a more definite structure (i.e. a History section that includes subsections for major time periods, detailing the unit's role in these conflicts), a Battle Honours section, a section listing Medal of Honour winners, etc.;
Citations - the article desperately needs in line citations;
Notes and References sections; and
Images from conflicts the regiment has fought in (not a requirement for B class, though, as the infobox meets this criteria).

Anyway, that is just my opinion. I have added the B class checklist above to assist with development. AustralianRupert (talk) 02:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.usregulars.com/usarmy/15us.html
- In 15th Infantry Regiment (United States) on 2011-05-25 01:49:40, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
- In 15th Infantry Regiment (United States) on 2011-06-01 18:26:09, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 18:27, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Section[edit]

Rather than simply removing references located after the reflist, perhaps it'd be better to move the reference list below all references. Is there a specific WP guideline stating the location of the reflist? Bullmoosebell (talk) 09:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't remove the references, I removed the <ref></ref> tags, the presence of which after the {{reflist}} or <references /> template causes the mediawiki system to throw giant red errors, and left behind the re-formatted links. I generally migrate references if they're simply misplaced after the reflist; in this case they were added to the "Further reading" section as (one assumes) they are further reading, so all I did was remove the ref tags so that they worked. The reflist is intended to display the contents of inline references used in the article, not a set of external links to things like further reading pages, so in this case it wouldn't be appropriate to shuffle around the reflist so that it displays something it's not intended to display. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, to clarify that and answer the question you actually asked: per WP:FOOTERS, the references section should generally come above the further reading section. So we have a two-fold reason here to a) not shuffle the references section and b) not use unnecessary ref tags in the further reading section. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, but the problem is how the Further Reading section no longer maintains a pleasant aesthetic, given your recent edit. The link referencing the book PROUD TO SERVE MY COUNTRY is no longer cited simply as a number but as the whole link. Also, the 15th Infantry Association is reflected as a separate bullet rather than the reference for the book When The Odds Were Even. So, should links referenced in the Further Reading section be deleted altogether, or perhaps added to the External Links section? Bullmoosebell (talk) 04:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]