Talk:List of space forces, units, and formations

Definition of 'space force'

Garuda28 if this page is to retain its current title, it should be restricted to service branches, which is the clear collateral meaning of 'Space Force,' as a Force. U.S. Space Force, Russian/Soviet Space Force & antecendents, Chinese Strategic Support Branch etc. The others that are accumulating here are merely space units and formations at a level lower than a fully separate arm/branch. There's no problem with List of space units and formations, and actually maybe the page should be moved there, because that would be more descriptive of the current content. Right now to name this page it would be 'List of space forces plus smaller space units, formations, and agencies'. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 23:45, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

@Buckshot06: When I first created it I was mirroring it after List of air forces, which included army aviation, naval aviation, and non–independent air forces (Mexico, for example). I’m not entirely opposed to splitting off non–independent space units to a separate page, but based on the precedence at List of Air Force I’m also not entirely sure it’s necessary. Perhaps rename to list of military space forces? It would emphasize that we're talking about space forces broadly (in the same sense that naval air arms are military air forces, but not an Air Force as a branch) and not just in the specific of an independent service branch. It also would keep a common pattern with the other list of armies, navies, air forces page. Garuda28 (talk) 02:17, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

That would be fine, but you'd need to get rid of the space organisations of only unit size, like 1 RSU or 23 Squadron-as-is-now. You're wanting to bring in and include organisations of major sub-branches of service branches (like the FAA as you say, naval air arms). But actually there's no need to stick with the precedent so closely; space organisations are much less like the other three environmental branches right now (and just *wait* til we get to cyber!!). Still suggest List of space units and formations. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:24, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. My primary concern is to make this page the central article for all military space forces and units. I get what you’re saying, however I’m not sure that space units and formations fully encapsulates the size of some of these just like military space forces doesn’t fully encapsulate the small nature of some as well, and I’m anticipating further grown over the next few years (I could easily conceive a newly independent Russian Space Force or PLA Space Force over the next few years). How do you feel about the middle road of list of military space forces and units? I think it fully encapsulates the scale of what we’re getting at, on both ends of the spectrum. Oh boy, cyber is going to be even more complicated than this! Garuda28 (talk) 02:36, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

You know the standard Milhist term is "units and formations," otherwise to follow your exact wording - space forces and units - we'd have 23 Squadron (unit) and the U.S. Space Force (force) but leave out Allied Air Command, the French Joint Space Command, the Space Command of the RADF, all the Directorate of Space Assets (to be exact, all those Soviet ones with that rough wording were *staff branches with formations and units reporting to them*). Happy with List of space forces, units and formations retaining standard Milhist terminology. Thoughts? Buckshot06 (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

I guess I view the term "forces", across all domains, a little more liberally, but I think we've come to a good comprises solution. I’ll change it over! Garuda28 (talk) 02:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)