Talk:102nd Intelligence Wing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 102nd Intelligence Wing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months  |
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA concerns
I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are outlined below:
- There are uncited statements throughout the article, including almost the entire "History" section.
- The lead does not summarise all major aspects of the article.
Is anyone interested in addressing the above concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 04:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
102nd Intelligence Wing
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
The article contains numerous uncited statements, including almost the entire "History" section. The lead does not summarise all major aspects of the article. Globalsecurity.com is used numerous times as a reference, but per WP:GLOBALSECURITY it is considered an unreliable source; these inline citations will need to be replaced with reliable sources or the information it is verifying removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:56, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Factual matters
Among other items, the article says the 102nd is descended from the 318th Fighter Group and the 67th Fighter Wing. Other than the fact that both can't be true, neither is. There are other factual errors in the history section. Lineagegeek (talk) 17:30, 23 January 2025 (UTC)