United States: Military history Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
I know very little about this topic, and I may be misunderstanding something, but glancing at the article Psychological Operations (United States), it appears that while "Psychological Operations" units are primarily found in the US Army, they can also be found in the US Navy and Air Force. So should "Psychological Operations" be added as a "type" to the Navy and Air Force sections of this template? -- Jpcase ( talk) 21:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
{{
fyi}}
for this. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 08:12, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Jpcase: I would think the answer is rather simple and obvious; what do the sources say? - wolf 03:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Redrose64:, why not address 'RfC vs other options' with the OP on their user talk page, and keep this thread on topic? Not that I disagree with your concerns, but I only suggest this as it's a shame when discussions get derailed or prolonged unnecessarily. - wolf 03:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
United States: Military history Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
I know very little about this topic, and I may be misunderstanding something, but glancing at the article Psychological Operations (United States), it appears that while "Psychological Operations" units are primarily found in the US Army, they can also be found in the US Navy and Air Force. So should "Psychological Operations" be added as a "type" to the Navy and Air Force sections of this template? -- Jpcase ( talk) 21:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
{{
fyi}}
for this. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 08:12, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Jpcase: I would think the answer is rather simple and obvious; what do the sources say? - wolf 03:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
@ Redrose64:, why not address 'RfC vs other options' with the OP on their user talk page, and keep this thread on topic? Not that I disagree with your concerns, but I only suggest this as it's a shame when discussions get derailed or prolonged unnecessarily. - wolf 03:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)