Talk:Military recruit training

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Military recruit training 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

Archives: 1: 3 months

Military history: Technology

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

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:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

Australia Start‑class Low‑importance

	Australia portal Military recruit training 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
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	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.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:

[[Sri Lanka Navy#Naval Patrolmen|Naval Patrolmen]] Anchor Sri Lanka Navy#Naval Patrolmen links to a specific web page: Naval Patrolmen. The anchor (#Naval Patrolmen) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
[[Combatives#Modern Army Combatives]] The anchor (#Modern Army Combatives) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.

Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

A Winner of the March 2005 West Dakota Prize

This entry is one of only seventeen that have won the March 2005 West Dakota Prize for successfully employing the expression "legend states" in a complete sentence. --Wetman 07:59, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Army

How is like in the army 2601:681:300:5C0:79D0:CB5A:30D1:C4C0 (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just watch Stripes. It's pretty much a documentary.Niteshift36 (talk) 21:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page name change proposed

To 'Military recruit training' - because civilian employers recruit too and this is clearly a page about military recruits. Thoughts? If no objections I'll make the change in about a week and see what comes of it. Fugitivedave (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Turbin nuklir

Radio aktif kimia 114.122.20.115 (talk) 12:16, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An issue with wording

Hello! I’m not in the military, so I’m on the outside looking in, but based on what I’ve heard I have an issue with how a couple of things are worded here and on the related United States basic training articles. These articles use terms such as “taught to obey all orders” and “taught to obey orders without question”, but I’ve heard from veterans that that’s not exactly true. Recruits are taught to follow orders, but they’re also taught when NOT to follow orders. That’s because the U.S. military (and probably others) don’t want a repeat of World War II in which some soldiers committed war crimes/ atrocities and claimed they were “just following orders”. This was brought up when the soldiers at Abu Ghraib tried to use the “just following orders” excuse. Other people who had served in the U.S. military said, “No, don’t try that excuse! We’re also taught when not to follow orders to try to prevent incidents like this!” A source on the Military Discipline article talks about recruits following orders quickly and intelligently, so perhaps that would be better wording. This isn’t trying to promote the military at all, just trying to paint a more accurate picture. 2603:6011:8E41:A800:9C17:A1B9:A79D:17A1 (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]