Battle of Old Fort Wayne

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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

This is a good start, but it's still more outline than article; it needs to be turned into actual prose, not lists. Aside from that, the major points to keep in mind as it's being developed:

• Land warfare didn't suddenly appear in the 21st century. The current theory is important, of course, but the bulk of the article should be a historical treatment of the topic.
• Inline citations are much easier to add as an article is being written.

Keep up the good work! Kirill Lokshin 03:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks heaps for your assesment-as you can see I'm rather new to Wikipedia and your feedback is greatly appreciated. :-) Bennyboyz3000 06:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The real world is not like Battlefield 2, drop the "classes". All Soldiers are normally trained to operate as an Infantry Rifleman in some capacity, however most have cross-training as specialties. You'd be better off dividing the article into the different forms of maneuvre warfare on land (Mechanized, Airborne, Amphibious, Mountain, Jungle, Arctic, Urba etc.), as well as Guerilla warfare and Insurgencies. Then discuss the history, tactics (theory and reality), current trends, examples of major land battles, speculative material on future Land combat etc. Basically, when you're a soldier, you're not divided into a "class". Your unit is your class. And most personnel are not frontline combat but rather combat and service support, which is rather different. There's no discussion of the use of vehicles, artillery and emplaced weapons, logistics, ECM warfare, or anything of the overall "force multipliers" used by a modern fighting force. Really the only "class" divisions you can make is between Infantry, which is ANYONE fighting on foot, Vehicles, both combat and utility, emplaced weapons, emplaced support systems (towed RADARs etc.), fixed installations etc. And the lines are invariably blurred.

I didnt agree with some of the soldier classes and their equitment. A traditional sniper is much different than a designated marksmen and the distinction should be made. A sniper will often carry a standard service rifle (M-16) in addition to their long rifle. Also, engineers almost always carry rifles, not shotguns or just sidearms.

Overall, this article seems to be written by someone who played alot of videogames and hasnt seen much of the real military —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lifeline (talk • contribs) 19:17:44, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

My thoughts exactly! --Ukas 16:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted the "soldier classes" part. Better without. Some kids might think Battlefield 2 equals reality. --Ukas 16:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the introduction. The rest is just about late-20th century Combat Arms. Land warfare is of course a far more complex subject than just infantry, armour and artillery--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]