This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Referring to the note within the Citation Needed note in the article's introduction (reason=Most other claims are that only a portion of Wilbur Wright Field remains as part of "Area B") - I checked with the "WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE Fact Sheet", and it suggests "Wilbur Wright Field and the Fairfield Aviation General Supply Depot were adjacent [to Wright-Pat] installations located at what is today Area C of the base." Now I am not one to dispute facts over such a thing without first having a nice long conversation over drinks in a nearby pub with the local historians and the base commander, and I don't see any archived consensus discussions over the matter, but perhaps someone can shed some light over the dispute here? When we have a Citation Needed in the Introduction, which I would like to think is normally expected to be a place that is somewhat indisputable, and presented as a stipulation, it becomes a bit of a problem for viewers. Thanks in advance. -- T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 09:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
What evidence that this field was only named for Wilbur Wright?edit
Latest comment: 11 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I find no citation nor evidence outside of this article that the name includes only Wilbur Wright. Why would brother Orville be excluded? This is an important point and should be addressed unequivocally, else the article needs to be re-titled. Tmangray (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
