Video Talk:United States Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command
Untitled
I wrote the July version of this article and the Civil Affairs article which have survived largely unedited for the past six months. Linking CAPOC to 'propaganda organisations' is inaccurate and I have removed the link. MrPrada 08:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
This article was put on WP:VFD, but survived after being rewritten (Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/USACAPOC). Thue | talk 20:44, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Maps Talk:United States Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command
Good news stories?
"Its special operators are some of the most highly trained soldiers in the U.S. Army, and are responsible for many good news stories each day."
I have deleted this phrase as it entirely lacks qualification, particularly of the definition of "good news stories". It has been stated that it does not operate domestically, so where are these "good news stories" being run? What do they involve? Are the stories factual, or propaganda-based? How highly trained are these soldiers, and in what?
If anyone can clarify this by all means revert, but I see this sentence as being in violation of WP:NPOV. --IntrigueBlue 09:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
I think the "good news stories" that run domestically are created by the American Media, not CAPOC itself, and that needs clarification. Also, the nature of CAPOC is that the reservists themselves bring skills from their civilian occupations that aren't normally found in the military, therefor the term "highly trained" is accurate but in need of further explination.MrPrada 02:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
At least the "Psychological Operations" section deserves a neutral tone warning. Maybe a newsrelease|section badge? It's clearly written by someone whose primary interest is saying good things about this military group. I imagine there are good things to say about them, but it isn't informative and it isn't concise. It's just not what people are actually interested in when they look up this military organization. This page needs a real wikipedian. Not me. Perhaps there should be concrete examples of what this group does, has done? I'm going to throw that in there right now; if a real wikipedian will please stand up, they should feel free to revert me or even better to fix the section. 173.8.186.37 (talk) 23:31, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Why are non-American Non-Military people editing this page?
I see that several of the edits are form people who are A. Not American B. Not Military. Stay in your lane! From: CA/PSYOP Soldier Ft. Bragg, NC
Stay in YOUR lane, solider. The Posse Comitatus Act should prevent the Pentagon from including domestic "targets" in the "theater" of "war." Infiltrating American media to plant "good news" stories is UN-AMERICAN. And ANYONE can edit these pages; however, I do realize that the First Amendment stands as an inconvenient impediment to your propaganda mission. Operate within the bounds of the law and the Constitution, lest you become an "enemy of the State." --Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.119.132 (talk) 14:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
1st Training Brigade
Could someone more personally knowlegeable of their unit structure than me include 1st Training Brigade and their subordinate units into this page as being a part of USACAPOC(A)?206.39.41.2 (talk) 21:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Source of the article : Wikipedia