User talk:Bwmoll3/2009

451 SMW / 451 AEG

I notice you've strung these two organisations together. Would you mind adding a note saying either that the USAF has formally assigned the heritage and colours etc of the 451 SMW on the 451 AEG (and sourcing it in that case), or that it is not clear whether such a formal assignment of heritage has been carried out? That would make things clearer. Happy New Year! Buckshot06(prof) 11:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please watch your spelling

The last couple articles all have the same misspelling of Bombardment. Grika Ⓣ 22:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I fixed the three you got out. Grika Ⓣ 22:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Australia at War in World War II

G'day Brent, Congratulations on the tireless work you have put into the United States Army Air Forces in Australia page. Great stuff. The website administrator of OzatWar, Peter Dunn, would like to get in contact with you. His website has a wealth of information and he is looking at expanding. He is not part of Wikipedia so has requested me to make first contact. His email conatc is at the bottom of his website. Keep up the great work. Kind Regards --Newm30 (talk) 21:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indonesian airports etc

Hi - with the new milhist arts on obscure papuan airports - please also consider putting in the Indonesian project tags as well - thanks Satu Suro 00:15, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Field & Central Field, Iwo Jima

Do we have North Field (Iwo Jima) and Central Field (Iwo Jima) labelled correctly? Two airfields appear on the [satellite view of the island], an apparently disused field to the north and an apparently active field in the center. The articles, however, indicate that Central Field (Iwo Jima) is abandoned and North Field (Iwo Jima) is active. Hope you have better information than I have? - Canglesea (talk) 18:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you mentioned there were three airfields on the island. I will leave things as they are except that United States Army Air Forces in the Central Pacific Area seems to have the coordinates of the two fields flipped. I will flip them for now; hopefully someone will get a better handle on the actual coordinates. - Canglesea (talk) 19:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I love the new pages you've created on old USAF bombardment groups, especially the patches! §FreeRangeFrog 05:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

G'day

G'day from Oz. As you probably know I have corrected a couple of typographical errors (among other things) in the United States Army Air Forces in Okinawa article. One of these was the name of the author of Combat Squadrons of the Air Force, World War II. I don't know if you have inserted this as a reference elsewhere, but you might want to check other articles you have edited to make sure you haven't repeated the mistake. Cheers. YSSYguy (talk) 05:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:F-102-509fis-tsn-1969.jpg

I was just reading the Tan Son Nhut Air Base article and clicked through to the file page for File:F-102-509fis-tsn-1969.jpg, which you uploaded (thanks!) several years ago. There I noticed that number of people had commented there that the photo was incorrectly labeled -- including several who stated that they were stationed there in 1969. When you uploaded the image you credited it to the USAF Historical Research Agency -- it seems like they may have mis-captioned the photo.

I've removed the inline link from the article and added a note at Talk:Clark Air Base since someone asserted that was the actual location. If you're confident that these folks are mistaken please feel free to revert my edit.

Best, Sisson (talk) 09:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Malmstrom.gif missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Malmstrom.gif is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

9th Reconnaissance Wing

I noticed that you have edited that page. I also noticed that you moved some things around. I reverted your edits but I will fix the links which I meant to do and never got around to doing so. I don't want to start an edit war so i'll explain my reasoning. I never did like the giant history section and you sort of made it worse by putting those sections within it. Thats why I shortened it in a way when I merged the pages. Usually, as you probably know, these are kept separate from the history in most cases. I think that we should talk about this further because I know that it will probably continue with edits to each other's work on the page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thought that we had a template for that. I guess it is on to the Air Force Task Force for that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oneida County Airport

I'd thought that you should know this. There was only one Oneida County Airport. It is closed. It had no relation to Griffis Air Force Base. I realize that you aren't the only one to think this, but that is why I am removing the Air Force usage link from the page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of MAJCOM Wings of the United States Air Force

If you can spare the time, please add your new four digit wing articles to the master list at the article above. Best regards Buckshot06.

Hello Bwmoll3

Hi I was stationed at Myrtle Beach and I was involved in the rotatation for desert storm. I was in the Falcon squadron and I worked on on the wepons control system. When it closed I went to Pope Air Force base. I am trying to see if I am in the picture. I do see many of the people I work with in there including my boss.

Is there any way I can get a copy of this pic. It was very nice to see a picture of all the fellas. Brought back many memories.

thank you

Sperr09 (talk) 00:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I scanned that photo back in 96 and it was on a disk for years before I posted it here with the Myrtle Beach AFB article. Unfortunately most of my Air Forse "stuff" is in Pennsylvania at my mothers house.. It will be a few months till I can get up there and find the physical photo and rescan it. I'm trying to remember who worked in WCS.. I worked at the supply point up on the ramp .. and yes I'm in the photo as well :) After we got back I went to Shaw for a year then retired in 94. Went back to Myrtle Beach over New Years in 95 and took some of the photos I posted in the article. Was so strange then, as the base was totally deserted, but everything was as it was when I left it in late 91. Today, you can't recognize the base as many buildings have been torn down except for the ones around the flightine and in the Base supply area.. I am sorry I can't help you right now :( :( Take care Bwmoll3 (talk) 01:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"edited navboxes and relieved creep"

No complaints with your helpful actions; I was just curious how "creep" was relieved in the military base template edits? Nyttend (talk) 11:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for relieving my confusion :-) Whenever I see "creep" on Wikipedia, without a clear context, I tend to assume "instruction creep": thus this question. Nyttend (talk) 12:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency in nomenclature?

I was looking at the list of articles you created prior to whitelisting you with JVBot, and I noticed that you aren't being totally consistent with the names of numbered military units whose number ends in '3'.

On the one hand, there's 353d Combat Training Squadron, 543d Tactical Support Group, 323d Air Expeditionary Wing, etc etc... and on the other hand there's 453rd Bombardment Group, 563rd Rescue Group, 3rd Composite Squadron, etc etc.

Either "3rd" names should redirect to "3d" names, or vice versa. DS (talk) 14:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'External links'

Hey Bwmoll great continuing work on the USAF units. Just one thing. The portal links you're inserting are not external links - they're internal to wikipedia. Please don't insert an extra heading for them if there are no other external links - just place them without a heading. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 15:46, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suggest any change in the placings - just somewhere where they don't break up the text too much. Eg see what I've done at 316th Wing. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 16:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey - another question for you. The 801st Bomb Wing (Prov) operating from the UK during Desert Storm - where does it draw its lineage from and why was it selected for activation? Cheers and thanks Buckshot06(prof) 16:43, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MAny of these World War II units you're now doing (which is great by the way) you're listing as 'inactive USAF unit,' but then saying they were deactivated at times like 1945, 1946 etc. Surely they are inactive USAAF units? Buckshot06(prof) 20:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing. When you create new airfield articles, please add the category Category:Airports in Algeria or Category:Airports in Papua New Guinea or wherever when you do so. Otherwise they don't form part of the picture for later civil use. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 03:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please also categorise new WWII wings as Category:Wings of the United States Army Air Force in World War II rather than the overloaded master category Category:Military units and formations of the United States in World War II. Cheers and thanks Buckshot06(prof) 02:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response. But please don't simply ADD the category, because it's a subcategory of Category:Military units and formations of the United States in World War II. That higher category should be removed at the same time. Thanks and regards Buckshot06(prof) 02:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USAFCENT

Would you mind taking a look at this command's page, and expanding it along your usual detailed lines? It would be great to have more info about a presently operating and important formation. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 12:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

47th Operations Group

I was taking a look at General Kwast's article before I update his photo and noticed the 47th OG was recently created. It looks quite nice. Well done. -JE (Let's talk) (My contribs) 03:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:NorthWitham-19mar44.jpg

Could you explain to me why you believe this image is free? I'm not seeing it. J Milburn (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I'm being dense, but where are you getting that idea from? J Milburn (talk) 21:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore me. I've just seen this. I really, really should know that. Sorry for bothering you... J Milburn (talk) 21:27, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BRAC

Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia. Can I ask you to please spell out Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) instead of just throwing in BRAC? Many readers won't have a clue what BRAC means, which is why WP:ABBR recommends spelling out acronyms on first use. Also, the link is not useful because it goes to a page that hows numerous different meanings of that acronym, and not to a page that explains the Base Realignment and Closure. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 03:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

French communes

Hi, thanks for adding infoboxes to French commune articles. There are some things you should think of when copying an infobox from French wikipedia, see Template:Infobox French commune/doc#How to copy an infobox from French wikipedia. Please check the links to department, arrondissement and canton in the infoboxes, if they're red, you should fix them. The manual for that is on the link I gave. Best regards, Markussep ^Talk 17:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check a 13-month old edit?

Could you check a line from your editing to Twentieth Air Force over a year ago?

Another raid against Anshan in Manchuria on 26 September was inclusive.

Surely that should be 'inconclusive'? Or did they have PC way back when? :-) Shenme (talk) 06:01, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

For the millionth time, redirect is not deleting. The redirect is still there in case someone can find other sources to make the article again. Why are you so defensive anyway? You're still acting like you own every article you've ever made, and God forbid anyone should touch "your" articles. That's not how Wikipedia works. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:47, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So I merge the content like you suggested, and now you call me a vandal for doing it. Nice. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get the point. Jeez. I did merge the content, didn't you bother to look? No, you're just ferociously defending your precious little articles so no one can harm them ever ever ever. Quit being so posessive. Furthermore, you have no right to call an edit "vandalism" just because you disagree with it; MERGING is not vandalism, where did you ever get that idea? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of the content is already stated elsewhere in Only What I Feel. The track list verifies the songwriters and song length. Would you accept it if I moved the single infobox to Only What I Feel as well to make a dedicated subsection? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:28, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to delete, I want to MERGE. Why is that so hard for you? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TPH is correct here. He merged the information that was specific to the single into the album, and then redirected the single article to point to the new information. That is neither a deletion nor vandalism. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my vitriol. It's just that you refuse to budge even when offered a compromise, and then you go and make false accusations for me — such false accusations are an easy way to flare up one's temper. Otherwise, you have been doing good work on the project, but I still don't understand why you're so adverse to even merging. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marine Corps Air Station Futenma

You put the request for protection in the wrong section and it got removed automatically. I've semi-protected the page along with Yankee, United States Army Air Forces in Okinawa and Kadena Air Base which they also seem to hit. Cheers. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 20:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, some of the reporting pages seem to be more difficult than necessary. I had got tired of that editor continuing on like that. It's too bad they keep changing IP's as they may have something useful to add about Japanese opposition to bases in their country. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 21:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stansted

Any particular reason why you reverted my edit to Stansted ? MilborneOne (talk) 15:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for 31st Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron

An article that you have been involved in editing, 31st Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 10:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Air Force former bases

Thanks for your work on these pages. I've been going around a number and have added the correct category, usually 'Military of X' or 'Military facilities of X' where the base is still active. Would you please mind adding the category yourself in future? These are both closed U.S. facilities and active facilities of another country's armed forces. Kind regards Buckshot06(prof) 02:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hamilton Mall - Allentown

Hi, Bwmoll3! I noticed your addition of material on Allentown's Hamilton Mall and added a Onesource template to this section. It strikes me that the POV expressed here is limited to one source and that much of the story of the mall's development is missing. I'd appreciate hearing from you on the subject. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 08:15, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

330th BG

Thanks, mate for your assist on my 330th!!!! I appreciate all the assistance! B29bomber (talk) 17:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

City Of Allentown

I have seen several references to the "Allentown" being in the 330th, but she is not in any of our official records.., she either transferred in, late in the war.. or was in the 19th, 29th, or 39th BG's. I can put you in touch with these historians.., as we all stay in touch since we were all part of the 314th Bomb Wing. By the way., if you go to my website: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ny330bg/home.htm somewhere in there, I have the group logo! It is also in Flicker as well., I have seen it.., it is a cut-out from the 314th BG's Command Ship.., a piece of the fuselage that sits in Tuscon, AZ at the the museum that also houses K-40 'Sentimental Journey' a surviving 330th aircraft. Thanks again for your help!!!!!! Happy New Year!

B29bomber (talk) 21:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the Allentown website still says 330th BG. She was in the 39th BG.., not the 330th BG.

Thanks!--B29bomber (talk) 19:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

City Of Allentown.., Crew?

Would you happen to know the crew of this aircraft. Have confirmed she was in the 39th BG by the way. Spoke to the 39thbg's webmaster yesterday. www.39th.org Give him a shout. He is a great guy! If you can update your website..,if the Allentown website is yours.., and indicating that she is with the 39th.., we would appreciate it as it would avoid any future confusion. Thanks again, mate!!!B29bomber (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]