This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Military discharge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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:
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
oregon.gov (publication date unknown). "Military Discharge"(PDF). {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) Click to show/hide further details.
This article was quite rightly tagged for its resemblance to this pdf, but evaluation suggests that it is extremely unlikely that our content was copied from them. It seems to have evolved naturally. Searching for the point of origin of the bulk of this text, I find a series of substantial edits in March 2007, beginning here, with, for example, the following text: "The definition of each RE Code may vary from Service to Service, as currently it is the responsibility of each branch of the Armed Forces to establish reenlistment eligibility criteria, however as a general rule, a RE Code in the "1" series will allow for reenlistment into any component of the Armed Forces, and RE Code in the "3" series will usually allow the veteran to reenlist with a waiver." The pdf says, "The definition of each RE Code may vary from Service to Service, as currently it is the responsibility of each branch of the Armed Forces to establish reenlistment eligibility criteria." However, by this point we already have content in the article such as "Reasons For Discharge" that are present in the pdf as well. For instance, our article said, "If discharged for any of the above reasons, the servicemember will receive an honorable or a general discharge" and had said this since October 2006. Too, minimal changes in March 2007 suggest natural evolution here. In this edit, "Information protected by the Privacy Act" was changed to "However, information protected by the Privacy Act"--a change reflected in that pdf. While this examination can't determine that content in this article was not copied at one point or another from somewhere, it does seem it was not copied from here. --Moonriddengirl(talk)15:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
