Talk:501st Combat Support Wing

message: Crmadsen, please explain why you deleted the latest edits to this page? Meanwhile, I have put the deleted items back on to the page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.103.65 (talk) 18:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explaination Requested 

message: Per Wikipedia guidelines, all articles are to be neutral in tone with no editorial or personal views.  See the Neutral point of view help page for full details.  Additionally, all articles must cite their sources.  This is explained in the Citing sources help page.  All of the entries made regarding the morale and leadership problems within the 501 CSW do NOT meet Wikipedia standards and were therefore deleted.
Now, from a personal standpoint anyone who has problems with leadership needs to take it up with their chain of command.  If the issue is not resolved via that channel, file a complaint with the Inspector General.  Wikipedia is not the forum for discussing personal grievances.  Continued editing of this or any other article with personally biased opinions that do not meet Wikipedia standards will be reported as vandalism.  Reverendlinux (talk) 09:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to apologize for that, I got caught up in something else and didn't get a chance to add to the talk page. Reverendlinux pretty much just covered it: unless you have some source to the material you added, it is not in accordance with Wikipedia's policy of Neutral point of view. Like he said, file a grievance with the IG if necessary, but don't vandalize Wikipedia with what may be true, but is non-neutral POV regardless. Crmadsen (talk) 13:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation Given 

message: Sereant Richardson and Crmasden, you guys are assuming the poster has a chain of command or IG access.  The act of documenting a very real morale problem as part of the history of the 501 CSW is not a crime or otherwise violate law or DoD policy.  On the other hand, the not-to-bright-spark who used a USAF computer to edit the page, or Reverendlinux using his gov computer to edit the article during duty hours is big time FWA…and a pretty damn good news story should it break.  Also in the realms of FWA is using the 423 ABS comm guys to try and trace the IP address of the original poster,  or using AFOSI guys to investgate the Wikpedia poster…and once again a pretty damn good news story of how USAF utilizes their resources to censor unfavorable comment.  Would love to know what you two guys think.  Please discuss! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.103.65 (talk) 
:Unsigned user, you're clearly new to editing on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a forum for user's opinions, it is supposed to be a legitimate collection of reliably sourced content. You are very correct in saying that documenting a morale problem is not a crime, does not violate any law, and is not against any DoD policy. However, as ReverendLinux has already stated, it does violate WP:NPOV and WP:V. There is NO discussion to be had here, and I'm sure an administrator would agree fully with me. I am not arguing this from the standpoint of the Wing, I am doing so from the standpoint of any sensible individual on Wikipedia. The content will remain removed until you can fulfill what is required from Wikipedia's policy. Also, where are you seeing any talk of the 423 ABS using their resources to trace IPs? Wikiscanner does this just fine without the use of Air Force resources, I assure you. Please start signing your comments using four tildes (~) Crmadsen (talk) 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This section seems to have little to do with the article, and is not reliably sourced. Kevin (talk) 21:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Of the rest, the only bit that is sourced is that which was reported in Stars and Stripes. The rest should not be included in the article. Kevin (talk) 21:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

text: For the record, the removal of the subjective information was because I believe in adhering to Wikipedia goal of making this site one of an trusted encyclopedic source.  The ongoing editorializing on the morale problems, real or perceived, serves only to dilute this goal.  In the same vein, I happen to like Schleich toys and buy them for kids in my family all the time.  I would love them to become outrageously popular in the US.  Yet, I am not about to allow dilution of the Wiki entry for that company through links to commercial companies, one of which I just removed.  Therefore, I take exception to the comments regarding my neutrality.  As for my work ethic, you don't know anything about why I worked on this article; your FWA comments are way left of the target.  Now, if any of the local folks want to talk about this issue (and any others regarding the Alconbury area), email me; you obviously know my web site.  I'd be more than happy to buy you a cup of coffee at The Grind and debate this issue like adults.  Reverendlinux (talk) 08:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop removing discussion post and have enough backbone to discuss 

message: </blockquote>
:Are other editors fine with this? Or do you have suggestions?  Atyndall93 | talk  01:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the citations, but have left out the ref tags for now. The cites given seem to support the text I have left. Kevin (talk) 03:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Atyndall, thanks for the work on this.  I'm fine with the cited edits.  However, I'm not 100% on need the to include the information.  These events are minute in comparison to the overall historical scope of the article.  If they are to be included, maybe doing so in a subsection titled Leadership Issues would be appropriate.  Reverendlinux (talk) 07:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a subsection on this would be preferred.  Atyndall93 | talk  11:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

text: If there is anything else that you wish to add to that paragraph (or the article for that matter) please, feel free to tell me or the other users on this page and we will help you to write it into a format that will allow it to stay in the article.  Atyndall93 | talk  00:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I have added the paragraphs above as there have been no objections so far.  Atyndall93 | talk  02:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks a lot more like a Wikipedia article, thanks a lot Atyndall. Crmadsen (talk) 15:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The case is now closed, thankyou for your time.  Atyndall93 | talk  02:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes 

message: On July 23'd, Bwmoll3 moved the "Leadership Issues" section to RAF Alconbury.  I moved it back to 501 CSW.  It is well sourced. If there is disagreement with this, lets please discuss.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.178.65 (talk) 14:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the section to the RAF Alconbury page because the issues were with the 432d ABG commander, not the 501st CSW.   The two units are located at the same place (Alconbury), but Alconbury is commanded by the 423d ABG..  so for that reason I moved that section to the Alconbury page..  Bwmoll3 (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  re-Inserted "Leadership Issues" Section 

message: For clarification, the contributions to this article made on June 25th 2008 (20:28) were likely made by the 501 CSW Public Affairs Officer as indicated by the uesr name "501pao."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.178.65 (talk) 14:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  501 CSW PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 501st Combat Support Wing. 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/20070103102538/http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil:80/ to http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified