Talk:LOGCAP

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LOGCAP 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

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

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

United States: Military history Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

Untitled

The article as it stands reads as if it came from a military press release, making LOGCAP, a controversial aspect of private military companies in modern warfare, sound wholly uncontroversial The Angry Optimist (talk) 23:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. This page could be improved by: the inclusion of published articles or resources provided from non-military sources; rewriting the language (although some terminology is obviously necessary, many phrases reflect a military writing style that is foreign to wikipedia, such as "In 1985, LOGCAP was established primarily to preplan for contingencies and to leverage the existing civilian resources."); largely removing the first paragraph, which reads as a justification of the existence of LOGCAP. These changes, along with the addition of context, should transform this into a useful article. FunnyYetTasty (talk) 01:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While adding other material could make the article more neutral, I think that deleting this page would be a bad idea. This article is actually a bit more no-nonsense than the press releases that I did find, and one of the few articles with just a boiled down explanation of what LOGCAP is. Rixoff (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[[Category:"However, as a result of the criticisms leveled against KBR for contract performance, AMC ended the LOGCAP III contract in 2007." This line is completely untrue. LCIII did not end until 2011 and it was not because of KBR performance. LCIV had been planned for years and was actually supposed to happen years earlier. ]]