Talk:Devens, Massachusetts

Are there any citations to the ridiculous conspiracy theory? (other than "Current conspiracy theory") Wiliam Tyree is guilty and no evidence was ever presented that proved otherwise. Nor does it have any relevance to the Devens post. I believe it should be deleted or at least put onto a seperate page with other conspiracy theories. The biggest beef I have is that a definitive document about the Fort is mixed in with unknown or unproven facts about one incident on the fort.

Totally agree with the first part of this post and have edited the Devens entry to more accuratly describe the past and present Devens.

Move to Devens, Massachusetts?

As the Army base is now history, and most people in the area are coming to view Devens more as a possible town (or, at least, as a residential-commercial village) than as a former base, shouldn't this article be called simply Devens, Massachusetts? Wiki Wistah 00:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The Army Base is not actually history. There is still a mission there, including units of the Navy and Marine Corps, as well as DHS support, that are valid elements and should not be expunged from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tecarr (talk • contribs) 18:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Fort Devens has just shown up again on the 2009 list of active Army installations. It has a Population of 306 Enlisted, 2,151 Reservists, 348 Civilians, and 1,399 Family Members. It maintains 25 Ranges, 21 Training Areas, and 15 Maneuver Areas on nearly 5,000 Acres. Incidentally, now that - under the new DOD Joint Service program - Devens is probably going to provide ground facilities for all services in the Eastern Massachusetts area, the same way the Air Force is going to run all Aviation Facilities (regardess of who flies in and out of them), and Ditto for the Navy running water facilities for all services. Oh, yes, I almost forgot. Devens is now a sub-post of Hanscom Air Force Base for housekeeping issues. SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) (talk) 23:05, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 13:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Merger

Why has the CDP been separated from this article? I disagree with merging towns and CDPs, but this isn't anything like that: there's no municipality named "Fort Devens" of which the CDP is a portion. There is longstanding precedent for having CDP and everything else in the same article when there's a military installation and a CDP of the same name: see such a range of topics as the former Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, or Fort Drum, or Schofield Barracks, Hawai'i. I can't imagine a good reason that we should have separate articles. Nyttend (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was my point. Why split this off? The CDP article would only contain demographic and boundary data with no hope of expansion that would not be redundant to this article. --Polaron | Talk 02:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

It makes more sense because other localities are split, regardless of their history. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Forget that, I can just make articles surrounding the past and present, with the CDP in the present. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Devens, Massachusetts. 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/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 00:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)