Talk:Fort Drum

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. Referencing and appropriate inline citation guidelines not met. With appropriate references and citations, this article would easily be a B class --dashiellx (talk) 14:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject New York Assessment July 2009 =

Article lacks inline citations, and image usage does not meet WP:MOS (stack up, et al). With inline citations, and some copy edit, could be upgraded. Graded as High Importance due to impact on history of New York State. Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 15:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Several parts of the article are a mess, with seemingly random & meaningless tidbits thrown in. I'm very surprised this article hasn't seen more edit-interest than it has, since anything military seems to be a very popular subject for editing on Wiki, & the 10th ID has been in the news several times during the last several years in many conflicts & situations. It would be an interesting edit for myself, as a disabled vet who spent time with the 10th (although never at Drum), & a published military historian for a couple of decades. Unfortunately, I have tried editing, cleaning, & accurising Wiki-Articles on military matters before, only to have them reverted by the Wiki-Cop-Corps, almost every time by ones who are simply watching the specific article, never actually adding content, only deleting it. So I don't bother any longer. But maybe someone else will take an interest in the article some day. It really does need some attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.159.69.146 (talk) 04:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Size?

Is Ft Drum 65.8 km2 or 434 km2 because the article says both — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sedna1000 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

It seems that CDP designation, in the sidebar, refers only to inhabited space, while the in-article number refers to all space on the base. I've been doing a lot of research on this for my job, and the CDP box is always smaller than the in-line numbers. I could be wrong though. Broccoliboy5 (talk) 15:23, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Area Data is Inconsistent

The lead paragraph states the area is 107,265 acres (434 km²)which would be 167.6 sq mi, but the data box lists 25.4 sq mi (66 km2)which would be 16,256 acres. So there is more than a 6 fold discrepancy in the physical size of Fort Drum.

Fort Drum official website supports the larger figure, so unless someone has a more authoritative source I would suggest the data box be updated to reflect this.

It appears the smaller number reflects only the Census Designated Place (which is likely just the cantonment area), rather than the entire military installation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.51.185.47 (talk) 05:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Drum. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 05:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)