294:
71:
53:
22:
81:
310:
862:(EC) Canvass? As full disclosure I posted at MILHIST and WPAIR, the primary projects that this article would fall under, and thus genreally allowed. I know were suposed to state that on AFDs, but I didn't think it apllied to run-of-the-mill discussions. I did notify BQZip, a serving officer in the USAF last I knew, of the discussion, but he's the only person I personally contacted. Most of the others here are editors I've never encountered before. -
278:
262:
479:
you are simply convinced that you cannot be wrong. Either way: bad juju. However, unlike last time, I'm not hobled by a lack of time to edit, and I will not be browbeaten by the gaming tactics you used before. I'm a reasonable man, but I don't take kindly to being told that it's your way or the highway; so I suggest you attempt to reach a conclusion with me instead of escalating a disagreement.
200:
164:
661:
editing tasks of preparing an article to go live. One option might be to create a list article of the articles that deal with the USAF culture, and include the webcomic, the AFA Magaize, AF Times, and others. A single link to this type of list could probably be added to the AF navbox without much fuss. -
977:
Personally, I'm not as adament on the flags as I am the seals. The seals are not mere icons or decorations, but the official summary image for each respective branch of service. The flags I could go either way on, but I'd prefer to include them as further distinguishing marks for each branch on thier
737:
Generally agree with the positions above. It doesn't really fit in a navbox about the structure of the Air Force and isn't really a history or tradition. I agree with Jackyd and BilCat's ideas for a cultural article though, but it might be an idea to increase it's scope to other arms of service or
342:
It seems not all of us agree about the inclusion of the CAP. my argument is that being an auxilliary of the USAF, and thier strong association with the uniformed service, it merits inclusion somewhere. While it may not be a command of the Air Force, we could include is somewhere else. I had placed it
840:
Bahamut, let me be the first to commend you for a discussion well-thought out. Even though consensus went against you, you stuck to your guns and attempted to convince us otherwise. Lastly, excellent job recognizing when consensus wasn't in the cards (yet?) and graciously accepting consensus against
660:
Having not served in any military, I probably don't have the background to do a culture of USAF article without a lot of research, and I don't have the time or perseverance (health) for that kind of task at this time. However, I'll be happy to help out anyone who wishes to start one with the mundane
752:
The scope probably depends on how long such an article turns out to be, and if some sections of a commbined article would be so large that they need to be covered separately. THe UK section would be quite large, as it would have to explain how every
American military tradition originated in the UK,
478:
Of course, you chose to revert it even after it was obvious that there was a conflict, and now 3RR comes into play; how very inconsiderate of you. But after the last altercation, I'm not particularly suprised. Your snide edit summary implies that you either don't care about avoiding an edit war or
545:
To be honenst, I don't like being told what to do anymore than you do, which Is why I blew my 2nd revert with that snide remark, after telling myself I wasn't going to revert you. And if you don't want to escalate a disagreement, there rest of what you wrote isn't the way to achive that. -
1104:
There are many more training courses that Airmen attend that could be added to the training section of this navbox (ALS, NCOA, SNCOA, ASBC, SOS, ACSC, AWC, Chief School, General School, etc). What's the best way to add them? We could list them all, add a link to the
459:
is about a web comic; it does not tell the history, or decribe the traditions, of the USAF, hence it's inappropriate. The comic itself covers (parodies) USAF traditions, but the article isn't about those traditions. I doubt the comic has been around long enough to
486:, go right ahead. Simply because it's not there now doesn't mean it shouldn't be. But simply because it's a commercial enterprise doesn't mean it's not significant to the service in question. The navbox is simply an aid in navigation, and since all four of the
402:
That's not a reason not to include the article in this navbox. The comic is surely relevant to the culture of the United States Air Force. Simply not being an official history or tradition doesn't mean
Knowledge should remove it.
301:
182:
317:
186:
490:
newspapers are prettymuch the premier source of third-party news (and second in sources only to the published media of the military itself), I couldn't see any reason why the Air Force Times wasn't already
788:
I wish I was making it up! ANd the Brits did make a big mistake not givng us taxation with representation - Our
Congress had proven that it can be very successful - for them! - 19:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1251:, as well as unifying the name with the organization. I received no response when prompting the discussion a few days ago on the template's talk page, and I believe such a move would be uncontroversial.
509:, but alas, no such page exists. I haven't the time or the resources to write it, and I'd bet that you're not going to write it in the immediate future, either, though such would be a pleasant suprise.
614:
506:
505:
To your last point: sure, it's not an integral part of Air Force hitory or tradition, but that again doesn't preclude its inclusion. It would be worth taking off is there was an article such as
285:
178:
269:
174:
613:
should be at {{US Army navbox}}. The problem isn't so much that it is unofficial, as that it simply isn't important enough. Please find a more appropriate place to link this from - if
771:
Let's not make up things...after all, if the Brits hadn't screwed up the military traditions that originated in France, Rome, and Greece, the
Americans wouldn't have to fix them. ;-)
609:
I concur with BilCat on this, there is no way that this web cartoon is important enough to the history of the USAF to appear in the Navbox, any more than the (far more influential)
1437:
1447:
1402:
1106:
1442:
1452:
888:). Seems like a nice guy and I find the strips to be a riot (I even posted a couple dozen printouts in our breakroom). I just don't see how they fit into this info box.
576:
I'm glad you understand my position. So what do you think about the points I brought up? I'd like to resolve this in a more cooperative manner than we have in the past.
841:
what you wished. If more discussions were like this (civil and leading to a conclusion between reasonable people), WP would be a much better place! Once again, thanks!
392:
111:
1280:
747:
422:
1427:
1333:
1329:
1315:
1256:
1181:
1166:
1147:
1002:
I'm not suggesting the seals go, I don't think anyone is. The flags are tiny blurs and should be moved into the infoboxes below the seals or just removed .
1354:
1161:
Propose rename to
Template:United States Air Force. This would allign it with the full name of the service, along with the same title as the main page.
732:
1417:
853:
766:
376:
128:
1085:
1061:
1035:
1011:
997:
651:
595:
555:
528:
473:
444:
1412:
1185:
701:
679:
456:
212:
494:
Nothing about
Knowledge's coverage of anything is "official", and that shouldn't limit the navbox to articles about "official" things. For example,
1432:
801:
670:
1260:
1231:
1139:
900:
871:
783:
753:
or is a mis-application of a correct UK tradition, and that all UK military traditions are superior to US military traditions simply because they
455:
Also, The section of the template is titled "History and traditions". It's for WP articles that are about the history and traditions of the USAF.
1325:
1290:
1252:
1177:
1162:
1143:
1109:
article, or have the navbox link to a list of Air Force
Training. What are some other ideas/opinions? Fightin' Phillie 16:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
1422:
1392:
889:
842:
772:
721:
1397:
884:
I also see no canvassing here. Yes, BilCat talked to me and asked for my opinion, but I'm a fan of this comic strip and I've met the author (
1016:
That seems like a good compromise. There is plenty of vertical space in that part of the navbox. If Bill is OK with it, I'll execute this.
367:
While I disagree that it's association is significant in any command or administration, I have placed CAP in it's own
Civilian Catergory.
1407:
1209:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
118:
396:
714:
361:
834:
695:
720:
Gonna concur with the vast majority here. It doesn't need to be put in the AF nav box. It isn't history and it isn't a "tradition".
626:
123:
1170:
928:
1125:
1191:
431:
I concur with its removal. There are probably many other non-official publications that could be listed, so why only this one?
207:
169:
216:
106:
102:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
388:
94:
58:
1151:
710:
1078:
1028:
990:
827:
588:
521:
415:
355:
1300:
1241:
387:
The link to the comic strip wiki page is not appropriate. It is a comercial enterprise seeking private donations.
1268:
948:
686:. Just a fictional website/story not any more notable then loads of other fictional stories about the air force.
1140:
http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2016/June%202016/June%2029%202016/ACC-Assumes-Authority-for-CAP.aspx
968:
498:
has no name, but we gave an unofficial one to the article so that it had a title. Or the unofficial name of
211:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
1237:
33:
1276:
1121:
495:
1312:
886:
my favorite strip...the bottom one where Leia promises to wear "the outfit from Jabba-the-Hut's palace"
1364:
1200:
1138:
CAP should be moved into the command section as it is now considered to be part of the total force (
916:
910:
337:
1248:
958:
938:
382:
1272:
1156:
1117:
743:
1374:
1350:
1210:
1076:
1026:
988:
825:
691:
586:
519:
413:
350:
39:
1113:
86:
8:
1305:
1294:
622:
1227:
682:
is that important to add to this navbox and certainly does not appear to be related to
639:
293:
797:
739:
705:
464:
a historical tradition, but if it is, it'll need a reliable source that says that. -
372:
343:
under that section administratively because, well, I didn't know where else it fits.
1346:
1068:
1057:
1018:
1007:
980:
924:
867:
817:
762:
687:
666:
578:
551:
511:
469:
440:
405:
345:
792:
Naaw.. wish we would have had things like this when I was on active duty though
704:
isn't important enough to be put with all the other articles in this template. --
483:
432:
70:
52:
919:, at 20px they are tiny blurs of flags that most people have never seen before
885:
618:
487:
1373:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
1386:
1223:
934:
I'd like to mention that the issue also pertains to the other four navboxes:
645:
634:
99:
793:
610:
368:
98:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
1099:
1133:
1053:
1003:
920:
863:
758:
662:
547:
465:
436:
309:
1324:
That is correct. I apologize, I shouldn’t have made that mistake.
277:
499:
1107:
Professional military education in the United States Air Force
261:
1142:) by the USAF. Does anyone disagree with this proposed move?
815:
It seems that consensus is against me. I shall relent then.
199:
163:
1438:
Template-Class North
American military history articles
1448:
Template-Class United States military history articles
1403:
Template-Class United States articles of NA-importance
1363:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1176:
Given no response I am going ahead with the rename.
76:
1443:
North American military history task force articles
1213:. No further edits should be made to this section.
1453:United States military history task force articles
1377:. No further edits should be made to this section.
435:is a commercial enterprise, why isn't it here? -
1384:
974:. I'd like to centralize the discussion here.
1428:Template-Class national militaries articles
1199:The following is a closed discussion of a
302:North American military history task force
1418:Template-Class military aviation articles
617:doesn't exist, why don't you create it?--
318:United States military history task force
205:This template is within the scope of the
32:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
1413:Template-Class military history articles
1433:National militaries task force articles
1267:This is a contested technical request (
1247:– To unify the name with the main page
1385:
615:Culture of the United States Air Force
507:Culture of the United States Air Force
225:Knowledge:WikiProject Military history
215:. To use this banner, please see the
1423:Military aviation task force articles
1393:Template-Class United States articles
228:Template:WikiProject Military history
92:This template is within the scope of
21:
19:
1398:NA-importance United States articles
1218:The result of the move request was:
15:
139:Knowledge:WikiProject United States
38:It is of interest to the following
13:
1408:WikiProject United States articles
915:We should remove the flags as per
308:
292:
276:
260:
142:Template:WikiProject United States
14:
1464:
1301:Template:United States Air Force
1242:Template:United States Air Force
198:
162:
79:
69:
51:
20:
1192:Requested move 9 February 2018
286:National militaries task force
1:
1355:09:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
1334:05:11, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
1232:00:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
700:Ditto what was already said,
1316:20:56, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
1281:20:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
1261:20:03, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
1238:Template:US Air Force navbox
1222:, per the discussion below.
1186:20:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
1171:21:19, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
1086:18:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
1062:17:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
1036:15:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
1012:14:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
998:14:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
929:14:46, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
632:I fully agree with Jackyd. —
270:Military aviation task force
208:Military history WikiProject
7:
1345:- seems a reasonable idea.
1220:template moved as requested
901:04:41, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
872:00:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
854:00:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
835:23:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
802:19:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
784:18:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
767:17:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
748:15:46, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
733:05:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
715:01:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
696:20:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
671:04:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
652:00:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
627:22:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
596:20:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
556:20:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
529:19:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
474:16:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
445:16:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
423:16:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
397:05:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
10:
1469:
316:
300:
284:
268:
243:
239:
231:military history articles
193:
95:WikiProject United States
64:
46:
1370:Please do not modify it.
1206:Please do not modify it.
1152:00:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
377:08:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
362:12:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
100:United States of America
1249:United States Air Force
949:US Marine Corps navbox
244:Associated task forces:
738:even other countries.
684:History and traditions
313:
297:
281:
265:
145:United States articles
1052:Sounds good to me. -
978:respective navboxen.
969:US Coast Guard navbox
312:
296:
280:
264:
757:UK traditions. ;) -
87:United States portal
1303:for its rename? --
482:If you want to add
113:Articles Requested!
314:
298:
282:
266:
213:list of open tasks
34:content assessment
1283:
1273:Anthony Appleyard
1246:
1230:
1130:
1116:comment added by
1083:
1033:
995:
917:WP:ICONDECORATION
832:
593:
526:
420:
335:
334:
331:
330:
327:
326:
323:
322:
217:full instructions
157:
156:
153:
152:
1460:
1372:
1308:
1298:
1266:
1244:
1226:
1208:
1129:
1118:Fightin' Phillie
1110:
1100:Training Section
1084:
1075:
1071:
1034:
1025:
1021:
996:
987:
983:
973:
967:
963:
957:
953:
947:
943:
937:
911:Remove the flags
898:
851:
833:
824:
820:
781:
730:
650:
648:
642:
637:
594:
585:
581:
527:
518:
514:
421:
412:
408:
358:
353:
348:
338:Civil Air Patrol
251:
241:
240:
233:
232:
229:
226:
223:
222:Military history
202:
195:
194:
189:
170:Military history
166:
159:
158:
147:
146:
143:
140:
137:
89:
84:
83:
82:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
47:
25:
24:
23:
16:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1368:
1306:
1288:
1204:
1194:
1159:
1136:
1111:
1102:
1081:
1074:
1069:
1031:
1024:
1019:
993:
986:
981:
971:
965:
961:
955:
951:
945:
941:
939:US Army navbox
935:
913:
890:
843:
830:
823:
818:
773:
722:
713:
702:Air Force Blues
680:Air Force Blues
678:Dont think the
647:majestic titan)
646:
640:
635:
633:
591:
584:
579:
524:
517:
512:
500:this little gem
484:Air Force Times
457:Air Force Blues
433:Air Force Times
418:
411:
406:
385:
383:Air Force Blues
356:
351:
346:
340:
249:
230:
227:
224:
221:
220:
172:
144:
141:
138:
135:
134:
133:
119:Become a Member
85:
80:
78:
12:
11:
5:
1466:
1456:
1455:
1450:
1445:
1440:
1435:
1430:
1425:
1420:
1415:
1410:
1405:
1400:
1395:
1380:
1379:
1365:requested move
1359:
1358:
1357:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1319:
1318:
1295:AlexTheWhovian
1285:
1284:
1235:
1216:
1215:
1201:requested move
1195:
1193:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1158:
1157:Propose rename
1155:
1135:
1132:
1101:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1088:
1079:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1029:
991:
975:
959:US Navy navbox
912:
909:
908:
907:
906:
905:
904:
903:
877:
876:
875:
874:
857:
856:
828:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
807:
806:
805:
804:
735:
709:
676:
675:
674:
673:
655:
654:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
601:
600:
599:
598:
589:
565:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
522:
503:
492:
488:Military Times
480:
450:
449:
448:
447:
426:
425:
416:
384:
381:
380:
379:
339:
336:
333:
332:
329:
328:
325:
324:
321:
320:
315:
305:
304:
299:
289:
288:
283:
273:
272:
267:
257:
256:
254:
252:
246:
245:
237:
236:
234:
203:
191:
190:
167:
155:
154:
151:
150:
148:
132:
131:
126:
121:
116:
109:
107:Template Usage
103:
91:
90:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1465:
1454:
1451:
1449:
1446:
1444:
1441:
1439:
1436:
1434:
1431:
1429:
1426:
1424:
1421:
1419:
1416:
1414:
1411:
1409:
1406:
1404:
1401:
1399:
1396:
1394:
1391:
1390:
1388:
1378:
1376:
1371:
1366:
1361:
1360:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1341:
1340:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1317:
1314:
1313:
1310:
1309:
1302:
1296:
1292:
1287:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1258:
1254:
1250:
1243:
1239:
1234:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1214:
1212:
1207:
1202:
1197:
1196:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1154:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1108:
1087:
1082:
1077:
1073:
1072:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1037:
1032:
1027:
1023:
1022:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1001:
1000:
999:
994:
989:
985:
984:
976:
970:
960:
950:
940:
933:
932:
931:
930:
926:
922:
918:
902:
899:
897:
895:
887:
883:
882:
881:
880:
879:
878:
873:
869:
865:
861:
860:
859:
858:
855:
852:
850:
848:
839:
838:
837:
836:
831:
826:
822:
821:
803:
799:
795:
791:
790:
787:
786:
785:
782:
780:
778:
770:
769:
768:
764:
760:
756:
751:
750:
749:
745:
741:
736:
734:
731:
729:
727:
719:
718:
717:
716:
712:
711:contributions
707:
703:
698:
697:
693:
689:
685:
681:
672:
668:
664:
659:
658:
657:
656:
653:
649:
643:
638:
631:
630:
629:
628:
624:
620:
616:
612:
597:
592:
587:
583:
582:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
570:
569:
568:
567:
566:
557:
553:
549:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
530:
525:
520:
516:
515:
508:
504:
501:
497:
496:this incident
493:
489:
485:
481:
477:
476:
475:
471:
467:
463:
458:
454:
453:
452:
451:
446:
442:
438:
434:
430:
429:
428:
427:
424:
419:
414:
410:
409:
401:
400:
399:
398:
394:
390:
389:173.5.175.130
378:
374:
370:
366:
365:
364:
363:
360:
359:
354:
349:
319:
311:
307:
306:
303:
295:
291:
290:
287:
279:
275:
274:
271:
263:
259:
258:
255:
253:
248:
247:
242:
238:
235:
218:
214:
210:
209:
204:
201:
197:
196:
192:
188:
187:United States
184:
183:North America
180:
176:
171:
168:
165:
161:
160:
149:
136:United States
130:
127:
125:
122:
120:
117:
115:
114:
110:
108:
105:
104:
101:
97:
96:
88:
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
59:United States
57:
54:
50:
49:
45:
41:
35:
31:
27:
18:
17:
1369:
1362:
1342:
1311:
1304:
1299:Do you mean
1236:
1219:
1217:
1205:
1198:
1160:
1137:
1103:
1067:
1017:
979:
914:
893:
891:
846:
844:
816:
814:
776:
774:
754:
740:Ranger Steve
725:
723:
706:Patar knight
699:
683:
677:
611:Bill Mauldin
608:
577:
510:
461:
404:
386:
344:
341:
206:
124:Project Talk
112:
93:
40:WikiProjects
29:
1375:move review
1347:MilborneOne
1245:(corrected)
1211:move review
1112:—Preceding
1070:bahamut0013
1066:It's done.
1020:bahamut0013
982:bahamut0013
819:bahamut0013
688:MilborneOne
580:bahamut0013
513:bahamut0013
407:bahamut0013
347:bahamut0013
1387:Categories
1269:permalink
619:Jackyd101
1326:Garuda28
1291:Garuda28
1253:Garuda28
1224:Dekimasu
1178:Garuda28
1163:Garuda28
1144:Garuda28
1126:contribs
1114:unsigned
179:National
175:Aviation
30:template
1343:Support
894:BQZip01
847:BQZip01
794:Bwmoll3
777:BQZip01
726:BQZip01
491:listed.
369:Neovu79
1054:BilCat
1004:Gnevin
964:, and
921:Gnevin
864:BilCat
759:BilCat
663:BilCat
548:BilCat
466:BilCat
437:BilCat
129:Alerts
36:scale.
1080:deeds
1030:deeds
992:deeds
829:deeds
641:(talk
590:deeds
523:deeds
417:deeds
28:This
1351:talk
1330:talk
1307:Alex
1293:and
1277:talk
1257:talk
1182:talk
1167:talk
1148:talk
1122:talk
1058:talk
1008:talk
925:talk
868:talk
798:talk
763:talk
744:talk
692:talk
667:talk
623:talk
552:talk
470:talk
441:talk
393:talk
373:talk
1367:.
1271:).
1134:CAP
755:are
708:- /
1389::
1353:)
1332:)
1279:)
1259:)
1240:→
1228:よ!
1203:.
1184:)
1169:)
1150:)
1128:)
1124:•
1060:)
1010:)
972:}}
966:{{
962:}}
956:{{
954:,
952:}}
946:{{
944:,
942:}}
936:{{
927:)
892:—
870:)
845:—
800:)
775:—
765:)
746:)
724:—
694:)
669:)
644:•
636:Ed
625:)
554:)
472:)
462:be
443:)
395:)
375:)
250:/
185:/
181:/
177:/
173::
1349:(
1328:(
1297::
1289:@
1275:(
1255:(
1180:(
1165:(
1146:(
1120:(
1056:(
1006:(
923:(
896:—
866:(
849:—
796:(
779:—
761:(
742:(
728:—
690:(
665:(
621:(
550:(
502:.
468:(
439:(
391:(
371:(
357:♣
352:♠
219:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
