Talk:Camp Geiger

Military history: North America / United States

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:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Redirect[edit]

This page needs a redirect to Camp Lejune as it is part of that base complex as is MCAS New River. Thoughts before I make the change? NeoFreak 21:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For right now I think they should both remain separate. New River definitely, Geiger I am on the fence about. Let me do some research and see what i can make of the article--Looper5920 20:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is Geiger is SOI East and more or less an annex facility. There really isn't much going on on Geiger outside of SOI. I've been trying to make something out of the article but I'm not sure where else to take it. If anything I would be more inclined to see New River get its own article before Geriger as New River has a flight line and is home to deployable combat units.

I agree, put this as a section under MCB Camp Lejuene but MCAS New River should remain separate.--Looper5920 20:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is years later, but despite the fact that Geiger is essentially an annex, I feel that it should remain seperate. New River has nothing to do with Lejeune aside from its proximity, and is no longer an annex (and hasn't been for many years). _spǝǝp ^spɹoʍ3100ʇnɯɐɥɐq 11:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]