Talk:John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School

message: Don't add text from Globalsecurity
The first version of this page was deleted for copyright violation.Hypnosadist 14:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

message: Much of the article is cut & paste material from descriptions of SF & SOF doctrine.  It really does not describe the school as an institution.  Instead, it gives us WP:PEA descriptions of what SO forces are and do. Improvement of the article in this regard is needed.--S. Rich (talk) 03:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:PEACOCK 

message: Why is it named after John F Kennedy? I can understand other namings, like the 1Lt Joseph Terry chemwar school, the Carlos Hathcock sniper range, but... i don't think that JFK was a specwarrior?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.180.109 (talk) 01:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it named after JFKennedy? 

message: # 1st Special Warfare Training Group (Airborne): 1st BN 1st SWTG (A), 3rd BN 1st SWTG (A), 5th BN 1st SWTG (A), and D CO SPT BN 1st SWTG (A)
# 2nd Special Warfare Training Group (Airborne): 2nd BN 2nd SWTG (A), 6th BN 2nd SWTG (A) (yes, saw now that I forgot to change the 1st to 2nd for these two battalions.)
# Special Operations Center of Excellence Education Support Cell (ESC) "ESC is a team of experts who report to TLDE (Training, Leader Development, and Education)", not to the Directorate of Training, Doctrine and Proponency.
If you User:McChizzle happen to have more info on how to improve the chart, please share them. I am updating the chart as soon as new information comes to light or is shared with me. noclador (talk) 01:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough.  Given the "cell" reports to TLDE (not reporting to SWCS), then by your definition they should not be listed on your org chart.  Previously the "cell" reported to DOTD and the way the website is laid out suggest it still is, at least administratively given they report operationally to TLDE.  Since you are going down to the "cell" level, why is IMSO, VEO, and GMO not on your chart? Additionally, these units, including the support units and HHC, are airborne units, so your symbology is off (i.e. ). --McChizzle (talk) 03:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Amended and removed the "cell" from the chart. I assumed "cell" to be larger than an office (at least in European armies it is) and therefore added it. Per MIL-STD-2525B SF units don't have the airborne modifier, but I added it to the HQ units. If you have any other request about military unit charts (I believe I created around 90%+ of all of the charts on wikipedia), write me on my talk page and I will always fix them within 48 hours. Best, noclador (talk) 15:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Very nice.  With that said, there are some issues with the SFC org chart that need fixing.  The Chemical Recon Detachment were moved out of the Army Reserved a while back and are now part of the Group Support Battalion.  Also, just as it is with SWCS, all units are airborne and have to jump regularly to keep their qualifications current. --McChizzle (talk) 14:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's not a chart I made. My chart is at: :File:US Army 1st Special Forces Command (Airborne) Structure - April 2020.png. noclador (talk) 14:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chart sources