Talk:List of United States Air Force fighter squadrons

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 not met Structure: criterion not 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

Nature of List[edit]

I've removed the units that have been redisgnated as another type of squadron (bomb, test, flying training, etc) in an effort to control the length of the various squardon lists. I am open to discussing the nature of the list and include former fighter squadrons, however, I'd like to get a concensus before we do. Ndunruh (talk) 00:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that some you removed are back on the list, so someone must disagree with you. I think it would be a good idea. Double-counting "fighter squadrons" that have had more than one number (e.g. alotted to the ANG), I would estimate there would be in the neighborhood of 600 candidates for inclusion. If the list is limited to those whose last designation was "fighter squadron" (i.e. excluding Fighter-All Weather, Fighter-Bomber, Fighter-Day, Fighter-Escort, Fighter-Interceptor, Strategic Fighter, Tactical Fighter would make the list more manageable, but I think less useful. Perhaps a list of Fighter Squadrons limited to those that returned to this designation since 1991 woould be useful, but I think a new title would be needed.--Lineagegeek (talk) 01:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are too many squadrons listed that have been inactive for years if not decades. There are aircraft listed that have been retired for decades (e.g., F-4, F-101, F-102, F-106 and several others)2601:242:C200:F160:294A:BA5D:B780:73A (talk) 19:20, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of United States Air Force fighter squadrons. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150927060436/http://www.tyndall.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=21141 to http://www.tyndall.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=21141

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]