Talk:Military camouflage - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BlueMoonset (talk | contribs) at 14:58, 9 January 2013 (removing "onreview"; have put mistaken GA1 up for speedy deletion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:58, 9 January 2013 by BlueMoonset (talk | contribs) (removing "onreview"; have put mistaken GA1 up for speedy deletion)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Military camouflage is currently a War and military good article nominee. Nominated by Chiswick Chap (talk) at 15:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

A summary of this article appears in camouflage.

Military history: Technology B‑class

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

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

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

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Archives