Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Utopes was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at RVAH-7 instead.
The comment the reviewer left was:
There is already an article about this squadron, which is missing a lot of context from its days when it was designated as VC-7. In order to not duplicate efforts, that seems like the right location to add these appreciated improvements.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:VC-7 Squadron and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
I appreciate your comments about my contribution. I have looked at the article about RVAH-7 and noted their brief mention of VC-7. I would like to suggest that VC-7 and RVAH-7 are different enough from each other so that each would merit its own article. When VC-7 and VAH-7 were re-designated to RVAH-7, the mission of the squadron also changed. VC-7's stated mission was nuclear weapons delivery. It was formed to help the Navy prove its value in the nuclear age. VC-7 and the other VC squadrons proved that planes capable of carrying a nuclear weapon could take off and land on carriers. This meant that nuclear capability could be placed closer to possible targets and provide more deterrence than could be provided by the Air Force alone. The mission of RVAH-7 was very different. Its stated mission is photo reconnaissance, a far different mission than nuclear weapons delivery.
In keeping with Navy tradition the two squadrons have different insignia. This suggests to me that they are truly different squadrons and could be treated that way in Wikipedia. Schbrown (talk) 01:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
