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:
MV Sycamore is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This edit's edit summary says: "source does not indicate any controversy - it's a tabloid story with a defensive (and later sacked for this kind of stuff) minister, but no-one criticising the decision."
The headline of one of our references, says, "Aussies ship to be built in Vietnam in major contract blow". So, why shouldn't the characterization that this "major contract blow", to the Australian shipbuilding industry, be considered a sign of controversy? Geo Swan (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)Reply