Military history: North America / United States

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 not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

I can't edit references so I won't be changing it but item 8 "Army Knowledge Online FAQ" points to a link that no longer exists. Someone who can edit references probably should remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albymangels (talk • contribs) 00:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

fuck this shit i hate that is so hard to contact them i cant even find the phone number

Who's the asshole that put this up? OPSEC???? Also I see this only references officers. I know SOME NCOS did the actual work for AKO. This should be deleted for total bullshit. 195.226.227.100 (talk)Soldier in Iraq —Preceding comment was added at 19:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soldier/soldier

There have been a few reverts over soldiers/Soldiers. When referring to Soldiers in context of the US Army, it is normally capitalized.

Source Needed

The claim of "worlds largest corporate intranet" should be quantized, dated, and referenced as the NMCI article makes a similar claim.

As of March 2006, NMCI included some 290,000 computers, making it the largest internal computer network in the world[1]

--Maetrics 00:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV/Reference Needed/Style Editing

The bit at the end of the first paragraph seems highly POV - if not, please source. I use AKO daily, and I am not aware of any recent 'crashes' or unscheduled downtime, nor am I aware of any Soldiers that see it as a hassle - let alone one of their greatest hassles. On the other hand, anecdotally, the SSO option that AKO has provided for many other Army websites (with and without the CAC) has been a clear benefit to those Soldiers who had literally dozens of logins to remember - often with different and sometimes mutually exclusive password complexity rules.

Additionally, the entire article could use a pass with someone with a gift for editing with an eye toward clarity and syntactical correctness. -- Sapph42 (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LinkedIn Links

What's the policy on linkifying someone's name to a social networking profile? Doesn't seem particularly encyclopedic to me - more like personal promotion. If the person is notable enough to warrant a wiki article, create one. Otherwise, no link is necessary. Thoughts? Sapph (talk) 22:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further, the whole paragraph on the History and Development seems to unnecessarily focus on people who may or may not have been involved - including inconsistencies in title (Mr. Bailey to Major Bailey). Adding references needed tag. Sapph (talk) 22:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Originally the site was created by about 6 military and a bunch of contractors. I know that one of them created the initial wiki. At that time, there were not a lot of rules. 2600:4040:20A1:DF00:D52D:B7E1:F9DE:42BD (talk) 17:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Army Knowledge Online. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:26, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]