Talk:Rule of thirds (military)

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 not met

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

Notable?

It's not clear after a cursory google search that this is an actual term used in the military community; even searching with the additional terms "military" and "deployment" failed to turn up a single instance of this term actually being used in the way it's presented in this article. Some sources could clear this up quickly, but I'll be putting this article up on AfD if there's no response within a week. siafu (talk) 18:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In this article: "Outside View: U.S. military over-extended By DAVID ISENBERG, UPI Outside View Commentator" Located here: http://www.upi.com/Outside-View-US-military-over-extended/99331170422550/ This writer refers directly to the doctrine, though he does not name it. Instead, he cites in his article, as a reference, other sources for his information. Here is the direct quote: "For a professional volunteer military force to be able to retain soldiers over time, the rule of thumb for active duty units is a three to one rotation ratio, meaning three units are needed to keep one unit fielded. So keeping 150,000 troops in Iraq requires an additional 300,000 for rotation or a total of 450,000 soldiers." John L. Hunter 12:42, 3 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JLHunter (talk • contribs)