Talk:453rd Bombardment Group

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 453rd Bombardment Group 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

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States / World War II / Post-Cold War C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion 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
	Post-Cold War task force

Walter Matthau

It doesn't list it on this page, but Walter Matthau was part of the 453rd group with Jimmy Stewart. It says that on his Walter's Wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.228.90.28 (talk) 09:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

733d Bombardment Squadron

Please can someone clarify the relevance of the quote "Its 733d Bombardment Squadron completed 82 consecutive missions without a loss". I have taken an interest in the actions of the 8th USAAF 1942 - 1945. First I don't understand the term squadron. Though I know there seems to be various different uses of these terms. But most of all, how can the 733d have completed so many missions without loss when Groups like the "Bloody 100th" have suffered so badly. Either the 733d had FANTASTIC luck, or they were only given "Milk Runs". I'm not looking to trivialise anything, just want to better understand how losses were so uneven. Surely it can't be through simple discipline.

Requested move 2 March 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 19:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

453rd Operations Group → 453rd Bombardment Group – WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME Provides that the name of an article about a unit should generally be either the official name used by the armed forces to which the unit or base belongs. When a unit or base has had multiple names over the course of its existence, the title should generally be the last name used; however, exceptions can be made in cases where the subject is clearly more commonly known by one of the previous names. The current name of the article is apparently based on the mistaken impression that it is the last name of the unit. It is not (453rd Expeditionary Air Refueling Group is). Moreover, the unit's notability stems from its combat during World War II when it was a bombardment group, rather than its two years of managing refueling units as the 453rd Operations Group. It has never been active under its most recent name. I believe this is actually a technical move, but the article has a history of being moved back and forth between these names and the form of its number in the past. Lineagegeek (talk) 16:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 5 March 2021 (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.