Talk:Fort Detrick

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fort Detrick article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Maryland: Frederick County C‑class Low‑importance

	Maryland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Frederick County Task Force.

COVID-19 B‑class Low‑importance

	COVID-19 portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Sam Doak (March 14, 2023). "False: COVID-19 originated at Fort Detrick, a United States army base". Logically. Retrieved March 16, 2023. A few hours after posting his initial tweets, Bridgen followed up on his claims with a screenshot from the Wikipedia page concerning Fort Detrick. The section shown reads, "In August 2019, its deadly germ research operations were shut down following serious safety violations, in particular relating to the disposal of dangerous materials."

interesting source[edit]

In case anyone is watching this page. This article would make for an interesting source of information: http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=bio23&date=20040923 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbecker (talk • contribs)

Please sign your posts with ~~~~. In addition, requests on talk pages are almost always ignored 99.9% of the time. WP:BB.Travb (talk) 04:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy theory[edit]

Moved to talk page:

Possible note: Biological warfare center, with the recent expansion and recommisioning of Fort Detrick, the Biological warfare center has been listed as a potential concentration camp.

Please provide a source. thanks. Travb (talk) 04:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely -- real contingency plans for handling plague infected foreigners would like take the form of fatal airliner crashes with lots of flames...BaWaHaHaHa.

Come on. If you are going to create conspiracy theories you need to be more creative. This just relabels ordinary potential measures for quarantine and research on new plagues with a bad word. I mean where else would the USA have facilities for treating and researching a cure? You at least need to take some photos of Fredrick Maryland city limits signs being replaced with "Raccoon City" signs.

Propose adding text on National Research Council Report[edit]

Hi, I'd like to add a paragraph to the "post-cold war" section that discusses a recent National Research Council report about the possible toxic effects from past environmental contamination at Fork Detrick.

In 2012 the United States National Research Council published a report that reviewed two investigations of potential health hazards at Fort Detrick: a 2009 public health assessment conducted by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and a cancer investigation in Frederick County by the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and the Frederick County Health Department ^[1].

The report found the two studies are unable to demonstrate whether people were harmed by groundwater contaminated with toxic pollutants from Area B of Fort Detrick. Furthermore, it is unlikely that additional studies could establish a link, because data on early exposures were not collected and cannot be obtained or reliably estimated now.

I'd appreciate any comments or edits. Earlgrey101 (talk) 16:43, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.dels.nas.edu/Report/Review-Studies-Possible-Toxic/13375

1985 incident[edit]

i'm watching the bourne legacy and rachel weisz's charcter briefly mentions this incident... is this the same fort? should it be mentioned in this article? (i don't mean the brief mention in bourne) ≈Sensorsweep (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Fort Detrick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080805031940/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5gH1fcT1QrjvwIaAZTO63_lxHs9EQD929A37O0 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gH1fcT1QrjvwIaAZTO63_lxHs9EQD929A37O0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Detrick. 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/20140712094904/http://aterriblemistake.com/index.html to http://aterriblemistake.com/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 22:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Detrick. 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/20111010122812/http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/special_sections/sw/090110Ft_Detrick/Ft_Detrick_2010jhc.pdf to http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/special_sections/sw/090110Ft_Detrick/Ft_Detrick_2010jhc.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 07:36, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Detrick. 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/20120312152155/http://www.175wg.ang.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123203496 to http://www.175wg.ang.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123203496

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 09:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"This baseless allegation"?[edit]

The above doesn't sound that objective or encyclopedia-like to my ear. It's been a biological weapons lab for almost a century; that seems "baseful" enough to me. Membender (talk) 21:51, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Theories regarding the origin of coronavirus (COVID-19)[edit]

People recently have been speculating whether COVID-19 originated from Fort detrick. Many reports have shown that two months before the first case of COVID-19, Fort detrick was abruptly shut down following serious safety violations, in particular relating to the disposal of dangerous materials. Coincidentally, there were gew mysterious disease outbreak just 100 miles away from Fort Detrick, some experts called it flu while others responded with vaping as the cause. This raised huge suspicion between people, who began commenting on YouTube about whether Fort Detrick was the origin of COVID-19, questioning whether WHO should visit Fort Detrick. Despite many messages are being deleted by YouTube, it is still a heavily discussed topic by many chinese news sites, such as CGTN, Global times, China Now, etc. John Holbrook (talk) 16:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Sources) News reports about the mysterious outbreak: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MSPiUvhWobg&feature=youtu.be https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dfs7vu-3CyI&feature=youtu.be https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0vZMvMqvHg&feature=youtu.be

The article already mentions the conspiracy theories at the end of the "Post-Cold War (1990–present)" section. Also of relevance is our reliable sources policy. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted article from military.com[edit]

not working old link for citation 34 due to it being deleted from military.com: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/11/24/cdc-inspection-findings-reveal-more-about-fort-detrick-research-suspension.html/amp

working link on wayback machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20191127232721/https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/11/24/cdc-inspection-findings-reveal-more-about-fort-detrick-research-suspension.html— Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.203.81.48 (talk)

Done. Thanks for the tip.— Shibbolethink ^(♔ ^♕) 14:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Fort Detrick[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Fort Detrick's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CDC":

From COVID-19 misinformation: "SARS-CoV-2 and Surface (Fomite) Transmission for Indoor Community Environments". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 5 April 2021. Retrieved 18 April 2021.
From Outbreak (film): Centers for Disease Control Prevention (CDC) (May 26, 1995). "Update: Outbreak of Ebola Viral Hemorrhagic Fever – Zaire, 1995". Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 44 (20): 399. PMID 7746265. Retrieved January 29, 2015.
From Rift Valley fever: "Prevention: Rift Valley Fever | CDC". US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 24 September 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:34, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.dels.nas.edu/Report/Review-Studies-Possible-Toxic/13375

[1]