Talk:United States Space Force

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States Space Force article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 90 days

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Space (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Space, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.SpaceWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceTemplate:WikiProject SpaceSpace articles

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Spaceflight C‑class High‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Military history / Government C‑class Mid‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Military history: National / North America / United States / Post-Cold War C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Science Policy C‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it 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 was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2020 and 30 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jadolphe (article contribs).

Change name

Need to take out Mark Esper as Secretary of Defense and change to new Sec Def Christopher C Miller, in the current officers section, as of Nov. 9, 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.108.73.147 (talk) 20:50, November 9, 2020 (UTC)

Given UFO Intelligence Role From DNI?

The Space Force has reluctantly accepted the role of investigating UFOs from the DNI.[1] Chantern15 (talk) 20:22, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15[reply]

Actually, there is a UAP (UFO) task force currently headed up by the Navy, and the Pentagon is looking to have SF take over. SF leadership isn't happy about it because of all the space-jokes that have gone on since SF was created. There is mention of a report to Congress on recent UAP sightings mentioned in the article though. - wolf 21:34, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...I did not know that, so should the article be changed to reflect this new info?Chantern15 (talk) 21:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15[reply]

The Politico story says "The Pentagon is considering giving the Space Force a greater role in a stepped-up effort to track and investigate reports of UFOs". It doesn't say they have been given the role, so your Talk header is wrong and misleading. In any case, WP:NOTNEWS. - LuckyLouie (talk) 16:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added question mark to reflect that. I didn't know that. Well, let the editors decided what info they choose to include. I have no problem.Chantern15 (talk) 17:21, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15[reply]

Just out of curiosity, you read the Politico article, right? - wolf 21:22, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did, I just assumed that they would've done it by now.Chantern15 (talk) 02:35, 27 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

New enlisted insignia have been announced

I added links to the article on rank insignia so someone can import those here? 96.250.80.27 (talk) 06:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under the Reception section, add "citation needed" to the sentence 'The Space Force was accused of being a "vanity project" for President Trump, despite the concept being debated since the 1990s as a means to counter Chinese and Russian military threats in space.' 208.88.203.0 (talk) 03:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done the ref at the end of the very next sentence supports this content. - wolf 04:43, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"First Space War" title not supported by source referenced.

This article claims that the Gulf War (as part of Operation Desert Storm) was referred to as the first space war. While a source referenced does show that it was called this, the source used to make this claim contextualizes this title as being "misleading [and] inaccurate." I suggest that this claim be either removed from the article or edited to provide context.

The article summary at the top, without a source, claims that:

"The first major employment of space forces culminated in the Gulf War, where they proved so critical to the U.S.-led coalition, that it is sometimes referred to as the first space war."

and later in the History section under Air Force military space program (1945-2019) that:

"The tactical employment of space forces culminated in the Gulf War, where space forces proved so critical to the U.S.-led coalition, that it is sometimes referred to as the first space war."

The claim in the history section references Spires 1998, which I presume is also the source for claim at the summary at the top. However, in a note on this First Space War title, Spires notes that:

"6. Shortly after the conflict, commentators referred to Desert Storm as the first space war. Although also used by Air Force leaders such as Chief of Staff General Merrill McPeak, the phrase was largely a journalistic label used to highlight the visible use of space systems in support of warfighting during the Gulf War. The term came to be viewed as misleading, incorrect, and somewhat threatening from the military perspective." [page 335-336, or page 375 on the referenced PDF]

The article does not contextualize the "first space war" claim as a journalistic label, or as being viewed as misleading or incorrect. I believe the article should be edited to remove the claim, or edited to echo the context that the source provides.

https://media.defense.gov/2011/Jan/25/2001330110/-1/-1/0/AFD-110125-038.pdf

Malle Yeno (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is interesting in that the source confirms the term was used by primary and secondary sources, so I don't see how it just be outright removed. As for context, while the this source states it was "misleading", it itself doesn't provide any details or context as to why they believe this to be case. Let's see what others might have to say. - wolf 23:44, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The extensive use of GPS and surveillance satellites in orbit (space) is the missing context. Searching “gulf war space war” turns up many good sources like this. - LuckyLouie (talk) 00:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added a couple of citations to more current references. It's clear there isn't any real controversy regarding the use of the term. - LuckyLouie (talk) 16:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete size figure

The opening section continues to say that the USSF numbers 4,840 personnel but the second-anniversary video https://www.aftc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2879471/space-force-celebrates-2nd-birthday/ features the CSO saying there are "over 6,650 active duty guardians". 12.144.5.2 (talk) 06:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]