Talk:Boeing C-32

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

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 met

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

Aviation: Aircraft Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

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 met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Pelosi controversy

Is the Pelosi controversy really an appropriate addition to this article, especially as the second paragraph? It is a minor issue and doesn't really reflect much on the aircraft. Also, the story is still early enough that the facts have not panned out. This is not an article on a current event and is not tagged that way. (There were a number of very useful edits made at the same time as the Pelosi paragraph was added, so it shouldn't just be reverted.) arnoha 19:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, since no one has commented, I'm going ahead with the snip. arnoha 21:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it again for the same reasons.. —Cliffb 06:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph attribution incorrect

Not sure where the photo of the C-32 was taken, but its definitely not Andrews AFB. I was stationed there from 95' to 98' and know the runway/ramp areas very well. There are no hills or buildings like the ones in the photo on Andrews. It looks like a small, regional airport to me. -John B.

The original USAF caption says Andrews AFB. MilborneOne (talk) 17:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new to "wiki world" and still learning the protocols. How do you fix something like this if its known to be inaccurate, or do you? Thanks, - John B.

Difficult - as I know its wrong is treated as original research and not really allowed. You really need a reliable source for the location - and at the moment one reliable source (the USAF) says Andrews! might be easier just to remove the location from the image caption! MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Thanks for the insight. I just figured out the issue. I checked the original photograph on the Air Force website. The photo was released by the public relations office at Andrews, hence the caption "ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, Md. -- A C-32, a specially configured version of the Boeing 757-200 commercial intercontinental airliner, takes off here. (U.S. Air Force photo)." Andrews AFB is referring to itself as the source of the information, not identifying the location of the photograph. Not a big issue though. Rather than risk annoying anyone, I'll just drop it...

Yes, you are right about the USAF caption - I have removed the location in the article as it it not proved. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 18:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Are there any additional photos of this aircraft? This photo showing the aircraft taking off in the rain is the only one that I have ever seen. Can someone add others showing the plane in a different context (ie on the tarmac during a visit)? Can someone show the interior and the layout (isn't there a forward stateroom?)?

In the photo gallery that goes with the March 11th Washington Post article "Hillary Clinton widens her circle at the State Department", there are two pictures taken inside an aircraft (is this inside a C-32, a single aisle-aircraft with 2+2 first-class sized seats in the about 25% from the front of the plane? or is this just an charter for Obama's campaign while he was still running for office?). The details of this plane seem relatively secret... maybe since this was VP Cheney's former ride. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.238.175 (talk) 11:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a newer picture of a C-32 that I took last week. This is clearer, I think, and shows the newly-added blended winglets that the article references. I'm very new here, so let me know if I did this wrong, or if people would prefer that the older image (C-32.jpg) and the newer one both be part of the page. Thanks. Sam Meyer (talk) 01:43, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-added the older pic lower down in the article. Unless an image is absolutely atrocious, such as a grainy b/w image from WWII, it's usually better to leave the former image in the article if there was only one to begin with, the images aren't basically the same view, and if the article is long enough for more than one image to fit without causing blank spaces. In the Air Force Two article, for example, it was best to leave out the second C-32 image, as you did. - BilCat (talk) 23:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Sam. I was the one making the gripe about the lack of photos. 68.110.237.188 (talk) 02:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]