Template:Did you know nominations/Female Engagement Team

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Female Engagement Team

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

A FET gathering information

• ... that Team Lioness are considered as the forerunners of FETs (example pictured)? Source: (1) 2003-2004: The first group of women, known as Team Lioness... (2) The Women of Team Lioness. The Beginning of Female Engagement. Chapter 3.
  • ALT1:... that Female Engagement Teams (example pictured) have their roots in Team Lioness? Same as above
  • ALT2:... that the US Armed Forces created female teams (example pictured) to interact with females in Afghanistan? Source: So in order to engage the female populace the American Army has established female engagement teams.
  • ALT3:... that many countries have FETs (example pictured)?Source: The US has no been alone in its use of these all women units...
  • ALT4:... that because of cultural barriers the US Armed Forces created female teams (example pictured) to interact with females in Afghanistan?

• Reviewed: Benjamin F. Lewis

Created by DiplomatTesterMan (talk). Self-nominated at 13:37, 24 September 2019 (UTC).

• Long enough (1,571 characters prose size, just above the minimum of 1,500), new enough and generally within policy about references and neutrality. Earwig found no copyvio. I prefer ALT2 or ALT4, because it gives the reader an idea about what an FET is. Suggest replacing "had to create" with the less opinionated "created" and "the Americans" with the actual military branch (US Army?) Otherwise, the hook checks out and the image is appropriately licensed. QPQ was done. HaEr48 (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• 1) As per the review - replaced "had to create" with "created" in ALT2 and ALT4.

2) The precise military branch would be the United States Marine Corps (aka Marines) (a branch of the United States Armed Forces) as per these two citations - "FET is a program that was started by the U.S. Marines Corps" and 2. But as per this citation Team Lioness was a US Army initiative which the Marine Corps adapted in 2009 as FETs (according to the timeline given at the beginning of the book in the section "Chronology: A History of Women in the Military#The Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan"). I still think saying "the Americans" or maybe even saying "US Armed Forces" would be easier in terms of clarity? What do you say HaEr48? I'm ok with any option here. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan "The Americans" sounds too informal and imprecise to me. especially if it shows up in the main page without the picture, people will have no idea the topic is related to the military (for all they know, "Americans" might refer to American tourists or some such). If it's okay with you, I prefer "US Armed Forces". HaEr48 (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

"Americans" might refer to American tourists or some such... lol, I didn't look at it that way. Point noted. I have changed the words to US Armed Forces. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 05:44, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Good to go now. Thank your for your response. HaEr48 (talk) 13:34, 29 September 2019 (UTC)