Category talk:Military

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I've reorganised things slightly in the categories because military as a category is wider than militaries. I envisage militaries being used to categorise the actual organisations, like the Luftwaffe, Royal Navy and United States Navy. Military should be used for wider things like military bases and doctrine. David Newton 12:39, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC) Militaries currently redirects to military. AlMac|(talk) 16:21, 27 July 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good idea. I don't belive that "military" should be a categorisation of "militaries" as this is bias in favour of the US meaning of the word military....why not make the list of "militaries" easier for people the world over to understand by using a categorisation of "armed forces", or else many people outside if the US may infer from a categorisation of "military" that it is a list of armies only. Admittedly, all would become clear pretty quickly to such a confused reader - but if people are going to settle on a name for a categorisation, it might as well be a name that is clear to people everywhere. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias--jrleighton 03:49, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

How is "Military Terms" a subcategory of "Military"?[edit]

I'm not sure of the distinction between the categories "military" and "military terms". It seems like any word or phrase under "military" would count as a "military term". Could someone supply a definition for both categories? A D Monroe III 13:35, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If no one tells me why I shouldn't, I'm going to merge these two categories. -- A D Monroe III 18:39, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Category cleaning[edit]

This category has lots of articles that need to moved to or organized into subcategories. -- Beland 02:07, 21 May 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]