Talk:United States Central Command

message: I'm tagging the Central Command page for speedy deletion. It's a c&p of the about us page (Google cache), and is (obviously) duplication.. - N (talk) 22:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Should we put in a section about CENTCOM staff? Like the J1, J2, etc.?
Hal06 13:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Staff 

message: Removed two references to a news blog from the penultimate section. Happy New Year!
--Yitzhak1995 05:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blogs as Sources 

message: I thought Dempsey was promoted to full General on March 13th, 2008? Thus the reason for my edits at his article. Was I wrong? GoodDay (talk) 18:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He was just confirmed by the Senate in March. The rank goes hand in hand with the position of commanding general U.S. Army, Europe. Therefore he will be promoted to the rank of General when he takes over the command in Germany. --GrummelJS (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dempsey's rank

message: I think the area of responsibility no-longer includes the horn of Africa.  The only African country included is Egypt.  This is hinted at in the second paragraph but is not shown on the map.  I think the map is from before the creation of AFRICOM.  The map needs to be updated.
Yaris678 (talk) 13:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Area of Responsibility 

message: General Lloyd Austin was approved by Congress to be Commander of USCENTCOM, sometime this month, thus my edit with "TBD". SamSennett (talk) 14:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Lloyd Austin

message: *The WP:lede does not adequately summarize whats in the article and vice versa. I will copy edit and move a lot into the body. 
*There is a problem with WP:verifiability, because of a dearth of references. Most sections are unreferenced.
*Much is out of date.
--Wuerzele (talk) 19:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: Same user is WP:editwarring a sourced sentence AND has been removing more than the sentence supported by the source.--Wuerzele (talk) 02:54, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  article problems 

message: 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 :United States Central Command'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 "africom-stands-up":
From Operation Enduring Freedom – Horn of Africa: 
From Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative: 
From Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa: 
From Camp Lemonnier: 
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⚡ 23:17, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:United States Central Command]] 

message: In order for this article to reach B-class, add more references. 86.22.8.235 (talk) 06:30, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  More citations needed 

message: It should be mentioned somewhere in the article and in the infobox, that CENTCOM is designated as a terrorist organization by Iran. KhakePakeVatan (talk) 08:39, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The designation was later upgraded to the entire U.S. Armed Forces, which it was decided on that page wasn’t notable enough to add. I don’t think it would make sense to mention it on CENTCOM without it being mentioned there. Garuda28 (talk) 13:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the editors there opposing its inclusion was a sockpuppet:  --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: While unfortunate, it looks like even without that editor it seems that there isn’t a change in consensus. Garuda28 (talk) 06:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

text: , you participated in the Talk:United_States_Armed_Forces#US Armed forces designated as a terrorist organization conversation. In fact, you pointed out in that thread that . Schazjmd (talk) 00:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Btw, it has been added to Iran–United_States_relations#IRGC and U.S Armed Forces terrorist designations. Schazjmd (talk) 00:23, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

text: , please discuss in the Talk:United_States_Armed_Forces#US Armed forces designated as a terrorist organization conversation. Schazjmd (talk) 15:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist designation by Iran  

message: Dear , the contractor details, as you rightly saw are not really suitable unfiltered for addition to this article. However, they may be really useful later wound in with other material. Would you mind reverting/removing the material and adding it to this talkpage instead? Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 11:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep! I can do that. Garuda28 (talk) 14:02, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contractor details 

message: a user has edited this page to remove reference to CENTCOM's designation as a terrorist organisation by Iran. For comparison, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps article includes the designation as a terrorist organisation. Why is the former considered "undue weight" but the latter acceptable? Both organisations have been designated as terrorist organisations by other states, to include one but not the other seems to me to be a suppression of information, and seems to me to be an example of systemic bias in giving primacy to terrorist designations from the United States and its allies, over other nations. 82.33.72.42 (talk) 00:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: See #Terrorist designation by Iran, where the consensus to mention it only in the article, not the lead, was established. Please do not edit war to re-add this to the lead again until a new consensus is reached. BilCat (talk) 00:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see such a consensus being reached? Can you please quote it? The discussion petered out without any consensus being reached, and then you appeared months later to assert "It is mentioned in this article already, and in the. correct place." That is not a consensus, just because you had the last word on the matter. 82.33.72.42 (talk) 00:49, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You've now been blocked for edit warring. When your block is up, you can engage in a discussion here to reach a consensus to add the comments to the lead. BilCat (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  designation as a terrorist organisation: undue weight?