8th Military Police Brigade (United States) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 22, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: North America / United States / Cold War 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: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) United States: Military history Low‑importance 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 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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:8th Military Police Brigade (United States)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Well done.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the lead, it would be best if "Korea" is linked once, per here. The article tends to have "red links", if they don't have articles, it would be best to un-link them, per here. In the Reactivation in Korea section, why are "1984", "1995", and "2006" linked?

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   It would be best if the references use the {{cite web}} format.

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the above statement can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All MoS issues fixed. The problems were just my misunderstanding of the style guide. -Ed!^(talk)_{(Hall of Fame)} 22:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Refcites done. How does it look now? -Ed!^(talk)_{(Hall of Fame)} 17:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Ed for getting the stuff I left at the talkpage, cause I have gone off and passed the article to GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.mnci.centcom.mil/News/PressReleases/Dec08/20081202-13.htm
  • In 18th Military Police Brigade (United States) on 2011-05-25 02:31:35, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 18th Military Police Brigade (United States) on 2011-06-02 00:26:30, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 8th Military Police Brigade (United States) on 2011-06-19 21:39:02, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are outlined below:

• There's uncited text in the article, with "citation needed" tags since 2021.
• The article cites GlobalSecurity, which per WP:GLOBALSECURITY is considered unreliable.
• The "History" seems to stop at 2008, which is when this article was promoted. Is there additional history for this brigade?

Is anyone interested in addressing the above concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 03:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result pending

There's uncited text in the article, with "citation needed" tags since 2021. The article cites GlobalSecurity, which per WP:GLOBALSECURITY is considered unreliable. The "History" seems to stop at 2008, which is when this article was promoted. Is there additional history for this brigade? Z1720 (talk) 23:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]