→"Empty" Command Articles
::::::Since the point of consensus seeking usually involves compromise, and since I think we've framed both perspectives...what is the compromise?
::::::I'm thinking that each article would be well-suited with a bit of information from at least one official source, which Dmon can clearly provide from his research. So, that would help others locate -at a minimum- a [[Policy:Verifiability|verifiable]] source. Now, since Dmon is really good at finding the big units (''i.e''. regiments) that don't get a lot of press, I'd think that as long as one fact could be provided with that source, then it gives something another Editor can possibly work on. For example, if ''[[Luthien (scenario pack)|Luthien]]'' only explains that the regiment has 2 veteran battalions and 1 green, then if he added that, there is no doubt the article provides value to the reader. Afterall, we're not trying to prove notability here: as long as the unit has been mentioned, then it can be written about with what little the official sources provide? How do you all feel about that? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 23:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)