Talk:Devens, Massachusetts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Cities (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United States / Massachusetts (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (marked as Low-importance).
 


Are there any citations to the ridiculous conspiracy theory? (other than "Current conspiracy theory") Wiliam Tyree is guilty and no evidence was ever presented that proved otherwise. Nor does it have any relevance to the Devens post. I believe it should be deleted or at least put onto a seperate page with other conspiracy theories. The biggest beef I have is that a definitive document about the Fort is mixed in with unknown or unproven facts about one incident on the fort.

Totally agree with the first part of this post and have edited the Devens entry to more accuratly describe the past and present Devens.

Move to Devens, Massachusetts?[edit]

As the Army base is now history, and most people in the area are coming to view Devens more as a possible town (or, at least, as a residential-commercial village) than as a former base, shouldn't this article be called simply Devens, Massachusetts? Wiki Wistah 00:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The Army Base is not actually history. There is still a mission there, including units of the Navy and Marine Corps, as well as DHS support, that are valid elements and should not be expunged from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tecarr (talkcontribs) 18:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Fort Devens has just shown up again on the 2009 list of active Army installations. It has a Population of 306 Enlisted, 2,151 Reservists, 348 Civilians, and 1,399 Family Members. It maintains 25 Ranges, 21 Training Areas, and 15 Maneuver Areas on nearly 5,000 Acres. Incidentally, now that - under the new DOD Joint Service program - Devens is probably going to provide ground facilities for all services in the Eastern Massachusetts area, the same way the Air Force is going to run all Aviation Facilities (regardess of who flies in and out of them), and Ditto for the Navy running water facilities for all services. Oh, yes, I almost forgot. Devens is now a sub-post of Hanscom Air Force Base for housekeeping issues. SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) (talk) 23:05, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008[edit]

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 13:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Merger[edit]

Why has the CDP been separated from this article? I disagree with merging towns and CDPs, but this isn't anything like that: there's no municipality named "Fort Devens" of which the CDP is a portion. There is longstanding precedent for having CDP and everything else in the same article when there's a military installation and a CDP of the same name: see such a range of topics as the former Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, or Fort Drum, or Schofield Barracks, Hawai'i. I can't imagine a good reason that we should have separate articles. Nyttend (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was my point. Why split this off? The CDP article would only contain demographic and boundary data with no hope of expansion that would not be redundant to this article. --Polaron | Talk 02:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
It makes more sense because other localities are split, regardless of their history. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Forget that, I can just make articles surrounding the past and present, with the CDP in the present. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)