Talk:Tan beret

Military history: South Pacific / British / Canadian / European / French / 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 met

Associated task forces:
/
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force
	British military history task force
	Canadian military history task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Notability[edit]

Is there any good reason for a color of beret to have it's own page? Burzmali 02:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have obviously not read through the article and the "See also" section. If you had, you would understand that it is an important military symbol. Tag removed. Ng.j 07:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be rude, but what article? All this page has is a collection of where tan berets are used. Who do you envision looking for an article on tan berets that wouldn't be satisfied by looking at Beret or the page for the military involved. Burzmali 13:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your question was "Is there any good reason for a color of beret to have it's own page"? The answer is yes. Ng.j 20:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]