Talk:Uniforms of the Australian Army

Military history: Technology / South Pacific

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force

Australia: Military history Low‑importance

	Australia portal Uniforms of the Australian Army is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Edit Reversion

Cooee IP, I'm IronBattalion and I'm reverting this change because the information in those sections extends beyond the titles that have been given. The First World War does not include the 1930's (that is the interbellum/interwar period) and the Great War is another name for the WWI (Primarily used before WWII (Australia also used that descriptor)). Secondly, Australia did participate in the Cold War, in the Korean, Malayan and Vietnam theatres; which are all mentioned in the supposed 'Korean War' section. Lastly, I proudly say that I'm a history nut... so please avoid the personal insults and try to relax. IronBattalion (talk) 08:11, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Current illustrations?

The article does a good job of covering the history of the evolution of uniforms, but is inadequate for use as a reference for what the uniforms actually look like. Simply saying they generally look like British army uniforms isn't particularly helpful. A section giving a breakdown of the classes of uniforms with an illustrative image would be a good idea. oknazevad (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, sorry, can you please explain your concern more clearly? There are almost 70 images in the article, so it seems to do a pretty good job of illustrating what the uniforms looked like in my opinion when viewed in conjunction with the text. Do you mean that you would like to see a separate section listing of the current orders of dress (i.e 1A, 2C, 2E etc)? If so, potentially a section like this could be added below the History section if anyone is keen to assist (I don't have the time at the moment myself, I am sorry), although to an extent this is already covered in the main article about the organisation; in terms of images we will probably be hamstrung by only being able to include images that meet site copyright requirements (there would likely be holes in the coverage of the images, IMO -- hence why I believe AC (the original author) went with only providing some examples in each section, I hazard). I think we also have to be careful not to turn the article into a rehash of the Dress Manual, so it would need to be a succinct summary, IMO. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 14:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]