Talk:303rd Military Intelligence Battalion
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments
[edit]Building the 303rd MI BN Wiki page for the lulz ~Jnwestbrook
Overly detailed and unsourced History section
[edit]The history section is significantly overdetailed and has no citations to back up the content. I propose to cut down most of the content in it. Ljleppan (talk) 10:02, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Continuing on this this issue, a cursory google search for the content within the History section indicates that the content in the WW2 section is copied verbatim from this Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=120202037995549&story_fbid=4136307383051641
The Korea section seems to be copied almost copied verbatim (with minor typographical edits) from several sources:
- https://www.facebook.com/303rd.MIBN/posts/4197291673619878
- http://www.asakorea.org/history.html
- https://nasaa-home.org/1Site_Map/Web-Sites-ASA-INSCOM/Z-korea-not-listed/his501st.htm
- https://www.nsa.gov/Portals/70/documents/news-features/declassified-documents/army-security-agency/asa-1952-vol-2.pdf
Most of the Vietnam section seems to be lifted from these pages, again verbatim or with very minor typograhic edits:
- http://www.asalives.org/ASAONLINE/batlbj.htm
- http://www.geocities.ws/Pentagon/Bunker/3946/856th/856th.html
- http://www.asalives.org/ASAONLINE/dc404det.htm
- http://oldspooksandspies.org/Reference/547_SIGNAL_TROOP_AND_THE_ARMY_SECURITY_AGENCY_vers_8.pdf
- https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?id=120202037995549&story_fbid=4291125137569864
- https://www.nasaa-home.org/1SIGNIT_&_ASA_History/history/ASA_Timeline_Vietnam.htm
All of this stuff seems to have been added by an IP user in a single revision: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=303rd_Military_Intelligence_Battalion&oldid=1010123414
As the content added in the revision 1) seems to be 90+% copy-paste from other texts, and concurrently removed reasonable looking pre-existing content, I propose we just undo the revision whole-sale. -Ljleppan (talk) 11:00, 4 April 2021 (UTC)