Info
I don't think I missed anything, but if I did, let me know! -Danik Kreldin 05:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
88% failier rate and nearly 25% of failiers were fatal. "Two die for every one that gets though?" The math doesn't work out unless all succesful troopers get killed. —Unsigned comment by 71.141.132.245 (talk • contribs)
- Unless I miscount, that means 12% make it, 25% die (slightly more than twice 12%), and 63% fail without getting killed. So the math works OK. — Silly Dan 00:41, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it says that of the 88% "nearly one quarter" are combat fatalities; I assume that means either nearly 22%, or nearly 25%. I've changed it to "around twenty percent" - thorough rewrite, too; seemed like too much of the phrasing and structure had survived, and the stuff from DESB and the ISB chapter on military structure needed to go in. As ever, feel free to disagree with the revised version! --McEwok 00:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Observ Detachments
152*3 + 5 = 461, yet the article says that Observ Detachments of 471 were composed of three 152-man companies, a Captain, and a four-man staff. 69.12.155.64 01:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Quote
- "Very little about CompForce endears it to the regular army"
- ―Rebel report on Sector Group organization
I removed this quote until it can be sourced. --Eyrezer 23:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ask and ye shall receive. Sourced (it's on pg. 94 for those who want to see it in context). jSarek 01:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
GA cleanup template
The only thing that I can see that needs to be done to bring this up to standards is to source the article. Once the article has been fully sourced per our sourcing policy, the {{Gacleanup}} template should be removed. Greyman(Talk) 06:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Full armor photo?
Don't they wear a helmet or something? Do we have a fully armored CompForce trooper in the article?99.188.36.80 03:17, September 12, 2013 (UTC)