Talk:33rd Cyberspace Operations Squadron

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 33rd Cyberspace Operations Squadron article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States / World War II / Cold War

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:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Merger

No consensus to merge. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:17, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There is a separate article for the 31st Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron. The 31st was one of the first recce units to be converted to an intelligence unit. The change of number in 1947 to prevent confusion with the "other" 31st Reconnaissance Squadron may have helped this drop through the cracks. Anyway, the usual MOS:MILHIST#Units, formations, and bases justification applies. Lineagegeek (talk) 22:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree' Bwmoll3 (talk) 22:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Keep separate articles for USAAF and USAF era units. --Kkmurray (talk) 03:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why?--Lineagegeek (talk) 22:15, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Change in unit number, name and mission. Time gap between inactivation and consolidation. Lack of article content overlap. Sufficient notability for content of existing articles. --Kkmurray (talk) 14:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See related discussion at Talk:622d Expeditionary Air Refueling Squadron--Lineagegeek (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 33d Network Warfare Squadron. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:26, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]