Talk:Fort Hood
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fort Hood article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. |
| It is requested that a photograph of the new Hood entrance signs be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Texas may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other websites. |
Naming issue
[edit]Editors are reminded that this is a contentious topic area subjected to heightened editing standards and scrutiny, and that controversial page moves must be discussed and gain consensus, with arguments being made in accordance with our policies, guidelines, and MOS on article naming and titles -- not based on politics, or personal preferences. We've been through this on two separate base rename articles now, each where the page was repeatedly subjected to a move and edit war over the names that had not yet taken effect, nor that had any WP:COMMONNAME or MOS:AT support. We're not doing that a third time; I've placed all of these base names under extended-confirmed protection for a month. If you want to discuss a move or change the name, make a formal RM, make policy-based arguments, and gain consensus. Be prepared to cite evidence of the move *actually* taking place -- i.e. not an announcement that a move will happen in the future (i.e. the 6/10 announcement from President Trump), and not an order to a subordinate for them to execute the name change; but to a reliable source that directly states the change has been executed.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:37, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Does an official Army General Order count? All seven name changes announced on June 11th were made official that day. The list of AGOs can be found here on the Army Publishing Directorate, each signed by the Secretary of the Army. Reverse Cosmosis (talk) 03:06, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's probably good enough, yeah. I can start the page moves now, and someone can go back through and update their body contents with a statement that these took effect June 11th.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
- Appreciate you. I'm new here and not touching real pages!
- For what it's worth I'm on one of those posts and watching it live is comical - webpage redirects, signs with both names, hastily rewritten notices, etc. Probably for months or years. Reverse Cosmosis (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oof. Good luck brother, and appreciate you taking the effort to go out and find the AGO effecting the change. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's probably good enough, yeah. I can start the page moves now, and someone can go back through and update their body contents with a statement that these took effect June 11th.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Fort Hood
[edit]The United States Army now officially refers to this Fort as Fort Hood. All official correspondence reflect this in addition to all Fort Hood social media accounts. Please edit to reflect this. 2600:1700:1D4D:7210:9869:7AB9:195:2B01 (talk) 18:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Not done -- not a properly formatted edit request, not supported by accompanying citations, no indication that the U.S. Army now "officially" has done anything; and primary source social media correspondence is not a determining factor per our article naming policy. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 18:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - Currently (as of the time I am posting this comment), the base's official page on the U.S. Army website still refers to the base as Fort Cavazos, and its URL for if the base was still called Fort Hood redirects to that page. Because of this, it may not be time to make changes yet. I will keep checking to see if the name change shows. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 23:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Now seeing that Wikipedia's guidelines prefer neutral secondary sources, I will consider adding a different, but still reliable, source besides the base's official website. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 23:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Update - Now the title of the page has changed to Fort Hood, and it's the other way around (in terms of links), but some parts of the page still call the base Fort Cavazos. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 19:01, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's not really dispositive what the Army's website states -- it's going to be weeks before they fully update all the links and pages for every constituent unit; in the absence of an explicit statement from the Army that the name change has been executed and is completed, the determining factor is what the majority of independent, reliable secondary sources call it (see WP:AT for more details). ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:04, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- So, do you mean that before Wikipedia makes changes to the topic's name (whether the base's article name itself or places within articles that mention it), either the Army has to make the change clear and official, or multiple reliable sources that aren't directly connected with the base should start calling it by its new name? I don't mind waiting before the changes happen, I just want to be sure before I try any more name change edits. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 01:13, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yep, that's correct. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 01:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 01:38, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yep, that's correct. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 01:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- So, do you mean that before Wikipedia makes changes to the topic's name (whether the base's article name itself or places within articles that mention it), either the Army has to make the change clear and official, or multiple reliable sources that aren't directly connected with the base should start calling it by its new name? I don't mind waiting before the changes happen, I just want to be sure before I try any more name change edits. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 01:13, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's not really dispositive what the Army's website states -- it's going to be weeks before they fully update all the links and pages for every constituent unit; in the absence of an explicit statement from the Army that the name change has been executed and is completed, the determining factor is what the majority of independent, reliable secondary sources call it (see WP:AT for more details). ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:04, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
Poor editing needs correction
[edit]The entire entry flips back and forth between calling it Ft. Cavazos (the official name) and Ft. Hood (the previous name) with little to no explanation of the change and no continuity. 132.147.158.82 (talk) 02:48, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- The article should use the appropriate name for the given time period it's referencing. Can you point to specific examples of where it uses "Ft. Cavazos" in reference to events prior to 2023? Or "Ft. Hood" during the 2023-2025 period? If so, we should fix those; they're usually accidentally inserted when someone does a mass find-replace. But if you're expecting one single name used throughout the entire article, that's not really how any of our military history articles work. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- The first paragraph makes it seem like the first time it was ever ft hood was last week. I believe this is intentionally misleading. 162.194.19.179 (talk) 15:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- The article should use the appropriate name for the given time period it's referencing. Can you point to specific examples of where it uses "Ft. Cavazos" in reference to events prior to 2023? Or "Ft. Hood" during the 2023-2025 period? If so, we should fix those; they're usually accidentally inserted when someone does a mass find-replace. But if you're expecting one single name used throughout the entire article, that's not really how any of our military history articles work. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
It's Fort Hood again...
[edit]- News: https://www.kcentv.com/article/news/local/fort-cavazos-officially-redesignated-as-fort-hood-honor-of-world-war-i-hero/500-69f48206-11a6-436d-af4c-74d9907ca7df
- Official government website: https://home.army.mil/hood/
FYI TuckerResearch (talk) 03:03, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
- Between this and the AGO posted above, I've gone ahead and moved the page; someone will want to take a pass through the text to clean it up. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:19, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
- Start-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- Start-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- Start-Class Texas articles
- Mid-importance Texas articles
- WikiProject Texas articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class North American military history articles
- North American military history task force articles
- Start-Class United States military history articles
- United States military history task force articles
- Wikipedia requested photographs in Texas




