Talk:Strategic Air Command wings

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

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 met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

The article "List of Strategic Air Command wings" was a first attempt. The information in that article has been incorporated into this article.

Suggestion

Could I suggest that this article be stripped back to a list of the wings, with the detail on each wing being contained in a seperate article? This current article is overwealming yet only contains basic information on each wing. Creating a seperate page for each wing would encourage people to flesh out the details and facilitate wiki-links from other articles. --Nick Dowling 03:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with that suggestion. This article, while chock full of information, is unfortunately too unwieldy as it stands now. Itsfullofstars 00:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Size Issue

What I will do soon to reduce the size of the page is move the Strategic wings (MAJCOM wings) to the Strategic Wings page, unless there are better suggestions. Buckshot06 22:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

reversion or reinsertion of deleted wings

Buckshot, I respect your knowledge and the fact that you're a SAC vet also, but what's the deal with reinserting the information that I remove when I add the information into their respective Bomb Wing pages? (specifically the 2d, 5th, 7th, 456th, 509th Bomb Wings) I understand that you've got a vested interest in this page (you created it, you've got multiple books on the subject, etc.), but I'm trying to do the right "Wikification" thing by taking the information on the unit pages.

If I'm doing something wrong, please let me know. If I'm doing something that insults you personally, let me know. Like I already said, I'm just trying to separate the bomb wing pages into their respective wings and keep the respect that they demand. Please let me know why you are continuing to reverse these changes that I am making. Thanks. NDCompuGeek 22:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure who you'rte addressing this to, but I'm Buckshot06, and I am not the SAC veteran, nor did I create the page or write multiple books about SAC. I think you mean user:R. E. Mixer?? Drop me a line on a talk page if we need to talk further. Cheers Buckshot06 00:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

moving wings

I am in the process of trying to shorten the page and, in doing so, give each wing a separate page. I started with the active bomb wings (I think I got them all), and am now moving on to the historical bomb wings, and will be (eventually) moving on to the rest of the wings in the Air Force. This is, of course, dependent upon my real-life obligations (ie - if my wife broke the computer over my head yet....) and my ability to secure references and verifiable information.

Any questions, comments, etc., feel free to leave messages here (I've got this page watched, so I can keep an eye on it....). Thanks! NDCompuGeek 09:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking this on! Itsfullofstars 00:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the same article as USAF Historical Research Agency defines Wings by the same author. What gives? -Taco325i 20:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with now. Buckshot06 05:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]