Talk:List of wars involving Australia
Ambigious word Ally
The last column in this table is rather problematic. The victorious party is usually the Allies . But to which side the word ally refer to is unclear. Because in other columns the word ally is not used. (Same with communist victory and coalition defeat) The author must be more precise to show Australia's stand. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
I think I know what you mean? Do you think it would help people more if I added in allies as well as opponents? 19 December 2011 Collingwood26 —Preceding undated comment added 23:46, 18 December 2011 (UTC).
- I think the words victorious or defeated must refer to Australian side. So instead of Communist victory you can just state "defeated" and instead of coalition victory you can state "victorious". You can also use coloring for victory, defeat or indecisive. (see Webcolor) Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 02:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- Of course links help to clarify. But my original objection was the inconsistency between 2nd and the 4th columns of the table . For example, in the second war, the result is alliance victory. Well which side was the alliance ? In other words, was Australia victorious or defeated ? Certainly after reading the linked articles one may draw conclusions. But the table must be more precise and even without using the links the reader should be able to perceive the conclusion. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I think that this version of the article is rather simplistic, and misleading in parts. Few wars end with simple 'victories' or 'defeats', and claiming that the Iraq War was a 'victory' and Australia's role in the Vietnam War ended merely with a 'withdrawal' is rather dubious. The more detailed version of this column also isn't without its problems, but at least provides a lot more nuance. A third option might be to list the Australia-specific result of each war rather than the overall result of the war (eg, in Vietnam Australia succeeded in maintaining the South Vietnamese Government's control over most of Phước Tuy Province until the 1st Australian Task Force was withdrawn, and in the Gulf War Australian ships were successful in their various missions but contributed little to the final victory) - I suspect that this might be more helpful for readers, especially as Australia played a supporting role in most conflicts. Nick-D (talk) 04:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
- Nick-D, I agree, the majority of that user's edits are nothing but edit warring. And looking back at older revisions of the page, the results were not even bolded, and it seems inappropriate to add bolding to the results here. For example, list of wars involving the United Kingdom and Italy don't bold the results. The bolding and changing of the outcomes were by an IP back in April, continued by a new IP 4 days later.
- Also, I agree that claiming the Iraq War as a victory is also disputed, and problematic considering Australia also withdrew in 2009. I think it needs to stick to the main article. Kirothereaper (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I think that the above remains relevant. In most of the wars listed here Australia's involvement was pretty minimal (for instance, Australian forces didn't fire a shot in anger in the 1991 Gulf War), and a simple "victory" implies that Australia played a vital role. Nick-D (talk) 00:07, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of wars involving Australia. 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://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/statistics/ww2.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at
Archived sources still need to be checked