Talk:Field ration eating device

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Field ration eating device article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Australia: Military history Low‑importance

	Australia portal Field ration eating device is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Military history: Logistics / South Pacific

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military logistics and medicine task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force

Wikitionary appendix dubious citation

As http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Australian_military_slang has no referencing itself, in my view it does not meet WP:RS--Golden Wattle ^talk 00:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More sources have been added. DPCU 03:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--Golden Wattle ^talk 08:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It it just me or are non of the sources reliable. Wiktionary and 3*blog links. Google shows only 42 non-wikipedia links. Does anyone have a reliable source for the slang ? - Peripitus (Talk) 09:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect slang will not usually have what might meet the criteria for a reliable source. Blogs meet my standards under these circumstances--Golden Wattle ^talk 20:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

42 google hits is simply not "widely known". We can't chose to ignore that it's lacking reliable sources just because it may be true. Meal, Ready-to-Eat is a good look at sourceable slang, I think this is simply not sourcable or notable, just listed on a handful of blogs/forums - Peripitus (Talk) 05:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not regard the number of Google hits as an authoratiative measure. The sources in the article are various, do not refer to each other and would appear to have credibility in that they are forums for military or ex-military personnel. In particular Australian Defence News & Opinion - MilitaryPeople.com.au and Digger History: an unofficial history of the Australian & New Zealand Armed Forces are not merely blogs or forums.--Golden Wattle ^talk 05:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peripitus, two of the sources for MRE slang are blogs (1, 2). How is a military community site less reliable? --bainer (talk) 23:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the sources may be blogs but "Meals Rejected by Everyone", "Meals, Rarely Edible" and "Three Lies for the Price of One" at least seem sourced to news articles. Some of the others really shouldn't be in the article. The reason I stated the 42 google hits is to highlight that that the term used in the article is not in wide parlance. There are no books or news articles mentioning and it cannot be reliably sources. While the sites that Golden Wattle has listed are not just blogs or forums the particular bits used as a reference do not seem reliable except for this, and hardly back up that it's "widely" used - Peripitus (Talk) 04:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You left out this one [1] which is one of the best if not the best Australian military history website. DPCU 09:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Formerly or formally?

Currently the stub contains "It was formally issued" - is that what is meant - I know the army is pretty strict but perhaps the article should read formerly as in not at the present but in the past?--Golden Wattle ^talk 00:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, FREDs are still issued in the CR1Ms, so I think "formally" is what is meant, although I haven't eaten one in a few years so I can't be certain. --bainer (talk) 08:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually scratch that, it seems they've been phased out :( I'll update the article. --bainer (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, I do remember the great formal Ceremony of "The Issuance of the FRED" Churba (talk) 00:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article and the talk brings back memories. 2.122.35.56 (talk) 10:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]