Talk:RAF Lakenheath

This article doesn't mention the various restaurants and amenities at the base. Is somebody able to provide a comprehensive list of these? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.46.2 (talk) 15:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Currently there is a Pizza Hut, Subway, Popeyes_Chicken_&_Biscuits, Charley's_Grilled_Subs, Cinnabon, Burger_King,Taco_Bell and Baskin-Robbins provided by AAFES. Sergeant Wiggity (talk) 21:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

No mention at ALL that the F-111's in the 1986 Libya raid came out of this base?? We lost 2 people from that base in the raid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.112.219.84 (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

murder victims found at base

i cant remember what year it was or the names of the victims, but i am pretty sure 2 murder victims' bodys where found in an alleyway by one of the perimeter fences a few years back. maybe someone else knows some details? KiraChinmoku _{(T, ¤)} 15:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Very belated reply, but this might be a reference to the Soham murders. - Cheers, Burwellian (Talk) 04:24, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Gate sentry

Can someone please add details of the gate sentry aircraft, mounted on a post near the main entrance? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

and no denotation occurred

Is it just me, or was this meant to read "no detonation" ? Jan olieslagers (talk) 22:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Fixed! Only took four years! Ttwaring (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Chernobyl and depleted uranium

The article as it stands, states "Had one or more of the bombs exploded, the resulting explosion would have scattered depleted uranium over a wide area, similar to a Chernobyl-like incident." Leaving aside the arguments as to (i) whether genuinely depleted uranium is as toxic as some make out and (ii) whether the bomb in question had a DU tamper as opposed to a natural uranium one, this statement is clearly nonsense, as the Chernobyl disaster (iii) concerned enriched reactor-grade rather than depleted uranium and (iv) was mostly problematic due to the scattering of fission byproducts rather than the unconsumed moderately-enriched fuel. Theeurocrat (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

That is what the source states, the information is verified by the source. One way system (talk) 16:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

One way system, the YouTube from Mark Felton is not an acceptable source for sensationalist claims that you are adding. The fact that neither Felton nor you apparently understand that there is absolutely no basis in physics for the false equivalency between the described accident and Chernobyl makes competence to comment in this matter in any way extremely questionable. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

1) I didn't add the said content in the first place, 2) I trust an academic's science over yours, since you are a random editor, and 3) you yourself need to provide a reliable source that verifies what you are claiming, and that disproves the source's claims. One way system (talk) 16:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

No, that's not how it works. Read WP:RS and WP:V again. A claim has been made. The source for that claim has been challenged, To re-instate the claim, a better source is needed or a consensus of interested editors needs to establish that the claim is acceptable. The latter has clearly not happened so the former is required. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, Dr Felton's doctorate was in the, err, 19th-century internal politics of the Sioux Nation. This does not qualify him to make assertions, necessarily, on Nuclear fission. If it can be verified by a topic-specific reliable source I'd have no problem with it being inserted into the main article, but I think it's a level of detail to high for this section here, which per summary style, is intended to present the broadest overview.

Per WP:ONUS (i.e., policy)—The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content—the material needs must be removed from the article until a consensus has been reached here. I have done so, in the hope that all parties will respect policy and guideline and thus avoid a request for administrative intervention or sanction over such a minor matter. ——Serial 17:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Information and reference reliability of African American GIs information

I think it would be nice to explain a little bit about the Mixed Museum regarding the self-published source (SPS) question on the information about African American GIs at Lakenheath airbase that has previously been replaced. The Mixed Museum is a digital museum run by academics and funded by the UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council. The information about Black GIs and Brown Babies on the Museum's website was supported by Professor Lucy Bland's research on the topic. Her book Britain's 'brown babies': The stories of children born to black GIs and white women in the Second World War was published by Manchester University Press in 2019 and won the Social History Society's Book Prize award in 2021. So the contents about Black GIs and the Brown Babies are supported by reliable sources. Lx18940917 (talk) 10:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

After May 1944 ?

It says who left then, but not what, if anything arrived after that and were there until the US came. IceDragon64 (talk) 21:20, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Answer- there were no planes- fixed it !

IceDragon64 (talk) 22:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

At least a Link to a Page about US coming

The article says that the US came to the base, but no information about the how and why of US base on UK soil. Even if this is very basic paragraph, or even just a link elsewhere, we must provide SOMETHING about this really important info. IceDragon64 (talk) 21:24, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Fixed it- linked to a wikiPage.

IceDragon64 (talk) 22:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)