Talk:Unitized Group Ration

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BorgQueen (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Unitized Group Ration – A is the only United States military ration that includes frozen food? Source: "The UGR-A is the only military operational ration that contains frozen food components."
  • ALT1: ... that the Unitized Group Ration – Express is designed to heat food itself without the need of a field kitchen? Source: "It is a compact module that does not require cooks or a field kitchen for preparation."
  • ALT2: ... that the Unitized Group Ration – Express has self-heating food packaging that can fully heat a meal in less than an hour? Source: "With the simple pull of a tab, the UGR-E™ is ready to serve in 30-45 minutes."
  • ALT3: ... that the Unitized Group Ration can feed up to 50 individuals at a time? Source: "Each UGR-H&S module contains 50 servings of pre-cooked food ... One UGR-A module serves 50 Warfighters ... Each module provides 50 meals ..."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/AMAN (naval exercise)

Created by AdoTang (talk). Self-nominated at 01:55, 24 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Unitized Group Ration; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - ?
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article is long, new and mostly cited. Earwig is picking up unavoidable similarities but it doesn't look like there is any actual copyvio. There are a few sections that need refs: The last sentence in "History", the second paragraph in "Menu options", and the second paragraph in "Paragraph". Also, is there a ref for the list of menu options? I see a ref that has some but not all of them, so I'm guessing that it's spread out across multiple refs. Out of the hooks, ALT1 and ALT2 are the most interesting imo. BuySomeApples (talk) 09:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for checking this one out.

• The last sentence in "History" doesn't have any sources because they never announced the UGR-B's rename. However, the UGR-M's page on the DLA website appears to have been written during the renaming process (but is undated AFAIK), so I think that'll work as proof.
• The second paragraph in "Menu options" is just a reader notice that I didn't think needed to be cited. Operational Rations has a different menu from present day menus, and it lists different menus from different years, so it might work there.
• By "Paragraph", I assume you mean the line about surplus sales under "Production"? Yeah, I reread the source and I must've read it wrong; I'll rewrite it.
• Menu references are the menu table PDFs found on the DLA's website (except the UGR-H&S, which has its menu on the DLA page itself); they're all in the first paragraph of the section. I didn't want to cite each individual PDF seeing they're available on their respective pages, but I can if I have to.

Tried fixing these to a passable degree, let me know what you think. AdoTang (talk) 20:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

@AdoTang: Thank you for working on these! The main thing we want to avoid is WP:OR or WP:SYNTH, so I think if a source doesn't say something in its own words, we shouldn't say it in wikivoice.

The renaming should be left off since there isn't a specific source for it.

The paragraph in "Menu options" should be trimmed down to something like a sentence about how the menu has changed over the years with the source you mention.

The menu tables are fine as is since the info is cited in the main text.

Once these are done this nom should be ready. BuySomeApples (talk) 01:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Changes have been made. Should be good to go.

If this goes through, choose whichever hook you fancy. I like the main hook the most, though ALT1 and ALT2 are also pretty good, and if I had to pick between those two I'd choose ALT2. ALT3 is meh IMO, and I just put it down for the hell of it. AdoTang (talk) 18:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

@AdoTang: Thanks! There are just a couple tweaks left:

"The UGR-B was renamed to the UGR-M at an unspecified date." This source doesn't say that, it says that UGR-B was phased out and replaced with UGR-M.

"UGR menus tend to change foods, options, or suppliers, with changes typically made every year or so." This should probably be changed to something along the lines of "UGR menus are continuously modified to improve their variety, nutrition and efficiency" which is more similar to what the source says.

I struck ALT3 and am ready to approve the rest once these changes are made. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:21, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Done. Should hopefully be good to go now. AdoTang (talk) 12:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I think this nom is ready now, approving ALT0, ALT1 and ALT2. BuySomeApples (talk) 06:19, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

UGR-E and the field kitchen

@AdoTang: The lede says that the UGR is intended to sustain groups of American service members with access to a field kitchen, which is true with the exception of the UGR-E. Given that the hook at DYK points out that the UGR-E needs no field kitchen, it might help to clarify in the lede that UGR-E is the exception to that field kitchen expectation, to avoid any confusion for people who arrive via DYK, which says UGR-E needs no field kitchen. - Aoidh (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Just added a note that should cover it. Yes, it's a note; I couldn't easily fit it in as prose without breaking the sentence's flow. AdoTang (talk) 23:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC)