Talk:Armed Forces Covenant

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Armed Forces Covenant 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

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Military history: British / European B‑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

B

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Prologue[edit]

I'm concerned this article strays into original research. The term 'Military Covenant' was only coined in April 2000 when the MoD published 'Soldiering - the Military Covenant' (although the first draft was apparently 1998). Various 17th century actions may have been influenced by the authorities of the day feeling a duty to provide for soldiers, but the idea of a covenant involving mutual obligation of the nation and the individual soldier would have been unknown to them - it is a recent invention. Sam Blacketer (talk) 18:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the page was created and written by User:Tommy1716, who has now disappeared, but had a fanatical anti-Labour and pro-Military stance to his edits. It does seem a term propagated by the media though. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 19:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the pamphlet was an MoD official publication and was therefore signed off by Ministers, I think discussion on whether the present Government has kept to its side of the Military Covenant is legitimate - provided always that all views are represented and none is endorsed. It's more the fake historical setting which looks odd. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legal status[edit]

I have added ‘It is an informal understanding, rather than a legally-enforceable deal, but it is nevertheless treated with great seriousness within the services’ according to the Guardian. It seems to have been drafted unilaterally without parliamentary process, then paraded as a blank cheque. – Kaihsu (talk) 17:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's helpful - I was trying to convey the same feeling but without directly saying so, but having a sourced comment is probably better. This sort of document would not normally need Parliamentary approval, though. Sam Blacketer (talk) 09:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt the Ministry of Defence can enter the ‘Nation’ (whatever that is in this context) into a ‘Covenant’ with Her Majesty’s Forces without approval from the United Kingdom Parliament. In any case, it is a fluffy document from a legal point of view, but a politically-important statement. – Kaihsu (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication at Military covenant[edit]

There is a (quite badly POV despite my efforts) article at Military covenant which I think can probably be deleted or merged into this one. Anyone agree? IxK85 (talk) 21:15, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Y this has been done. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Military Covenant. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www2.army.mod.uk/servingsoldier/usefulinfo/valuesgeneral/adp5milcov/the_military_covenant.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Legal status being acquired[edit]

The Armed Forces Bill 2021 (section 8), currently making its way through Parliament, will give the Covenant some legal status. Anyone fancy updating this article? Mmitchell10 (talk) 19:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mmitchell10 - does seem to me like the article could use a rather major update/redraft and I'd be up for giving it a try, though haven't made any big edits before! Anything in particular I should know before I start? Vbnnr (talk) 09:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Vbnnr, and welcome! Here's some links that someone sent me that I found helpful: The five pillars of Wikipedia; Tutorial; How to edit a page; How to develop articles; Simplified Manual of Style; WP:10SIMPLERULES. In terms of material for this article specifically, the official website can sometimes not appear in search results, so it's here: https://www.armedforcescovenant.gov.uk/ Any questions about editing in general or this topic in particular, then feel free to post them here or on my own talk page. Also, if you are thinking of making a big edit but feel unsure about it then again you can propose it on this talk page, or alternatively just be bold! Thank you for being willing to take this on. I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian! Mmitchell10 (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]