Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Project Waler

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Hog Farm (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 06:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Project Waler

[edit]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Nick-D (talk)

Project Waler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

Project Waler was a failed attempt by the Australian Army to acquire large numbers of high performance armoured fighting vehicles during the 1980s. These vehicles were to replace the Army's M113s and be built in Australia. The project proved over-ambitious, however, and was cancelled by the government after considerable scoping work demonstrated that the costs would be twice as high as expected and the Defence Minister concluded that the capabilities the new vehicles offered were in excess of what Australia needed. The very successful ASLAV wheeled armoured fighting vehicles were purchased from Canada instead, and the M113 fleet was subjected to an upgrade project that was also bungled. Project Waler is sometimes cited as an example of a mismanaged Australian defence procurement process, but it is not well known.

I developed this article as a spin off from my work on the M113 armoured personnel carriers in Australian service, and it draws on the fairly thin literature on the project. The article was assessed as a GA at the start of August this year, and after further work and copy editing I am hopeful that the A-class criteria are also met. Thank you in advance for your comments. Nick-D (talk) 02:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review: I see no issues with image licensing. The one thing I would recommend is adding sub-headings to the history section to aid navigation. It's quite long especially for readers on mobile devices. (t · c) buidhe 07:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this - I've added some sub-headings Nick-D (talk) 08:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hawkeye7

[edit]
  • Typo: "unafforable"

Support from Gog the Mild

[edit]
Possibly it is clearer, but it is still fairly opaque to me. What is "scoping"? Maybe an explanatory footnote?
Would it be possible to replace this with a word that readers (eg me) won't have to look up in a dictionary? (Eg 'happen'?)
This is a fairly commonly used word in Australia (for instance, it's frequently been used in headlines for news stories). Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Then if this were Australian Wikipedia it wouldn't be an issue. But, honestly, it is going to leave almost all UK readers guessing. Maybe guessing correctly, due to "eventually", but guessing. I strongly suspect US readers would be in a similar position.
The article is written in Australian English, and will likely mainly be read by Australians, so I really don't see what the problem is here to be honest (I also really like the word!). However, WP:ENGVAR recommends using commonly-understood terms, so I've tweaked this. It's interesting to learn that Australian English has quirks other than the over-use of abbreviations, calling people you barely know 'mate' and occasional rhyming slang! Nick-D (talk) 09:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That trivia is all I can find. An excellent article. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:00, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, a pleasure to read. A couple of responses on what I am taking to be either jargon or very Australian usages above. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by AustralianRupert

[edit]

Support: G'day, Nick, I only have a few minor comments. Apologies if I have missed anything, I am reading this between watches. Regards: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:33, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • in the lead, perhaps add what its biggest failings were in the final sentence?
  • this seems off, grammatically: " that an tender seeking formal"
  • "cost of the project had doubled in real terms since it began": do we know what this was?
  • tense shift: "By the time the M113 upgrade project was complete, the vehicles were no longer suitable for combat because they do not provide adequate protection against heavy machine guns, most forms of modern anti-tank missiles, mines and large improvised explosive devices."
  • "Camp noted that a contemporary US Army project had experienced similar problems" --> Bradley? (not sure - perhaps name the project if known)
  • Source review: assuming that Peter Jennings is the Peter Jennings of ASPI, then I believe all sources are reliable, being either government publications, or written by authors with credentials in the area/reliable publishers
  • there were a couple of minor issues with formatting, which I think I have corrected now: [1]
  • "In 1987 the Government decided to procure wheeled armoured fighting vehicles to replace the 2nd Cavalry Regiment's M113s. Due to the regiment's armoured reconnaissance role and location in Darwin, Northern Territory" --> it is a little before my time, but I thought 2 CAV moved to Darwin in the 1990s, not in 1987. Perhaps tweak this a little if I am correct?
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Project_Waler&oldid=1041378591"