Talk:Civil affairs

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Civil affairs 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: Technology Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

April 2005

There's a lot of information that could go on this page. History, relevance to ongoing operations, and information about sister units in the Marine Corps are all things that could be added. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wooby (talk • contribs) 00:37, April 21, 2005 (UTC)

August 2006

How about efficacy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.28.150.188 (talk • contribs) 10:44, August 27, 2006 (UTC)

Training Section

Adding a section on Army training. Will need copy-edit, Wikify, etc. Will also add some photos later on if I get a chance MrPrada 20:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States Marine Corps

Looking for further explaination on info added to the Civil Affairs article under the United States Marine Corps Section
"In April 2006, the United States Marine Corps realigned their Military Occupational Specialty structure to permanently create enlisted and officer Civil Affairs MOSs.[1]
The Marine Corps had Civil Affairs MOS long before April 2006. So what exactly has changed since April 2006? FieldMarine 19:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction on 1st CA unit in Iraq

The 422nd Civil Affairs Bn. was the first unit into Iraq supporting the 3rd Infantry Division crossing the berm that night of the invasion. I was with 3/7 Cavalry that spear headed the invasion and was the first civil affairs team into Iraq and helped liberate Iraq. My battalion also organized and ran the city of Baghdad before any local government or CPA was formed to take over. ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.55.2.50 (talk) 06:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 2008

I am a little confused. The Army civil affairs section says that it is a Functional Area, yet on 16 October 2006 it was classified a branch of its own. Could someone with a broader knowledge of this say what the implications of this would be? I think the information of officers not being able to start their career in it may be outdated if it is a branch. Here is the memo designating it a branch.

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/go0629.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownjenkin (talk • contribs) 02:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Correction on 1st CA Unit in Iraq

While that may be true, according to the Department of Defense Adjutant General Website, the meritorious unit citation for the 411th CA BN reads that they were the first reserve CA unit to enter Iraq and the first to return for a second rotation. You would need to cite a source stating the 432nd was the first unit in, that doesn't not violate WP:OR. MrPrada (talk) 06:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3rd Civil Affairs Group deployed as an entire unit for a second rotation in Iraq in January 2004 and 4th Civil Affairs Group deployed to Iraq for a second rotation in August 2004. I believe 3rd Civil Affairs Group may have the distinction of the first CA unit to deploy to Iraq for a second tour. FieldMarine (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first group to go in was task force 167. This group was a mix of 402d, 422, 411th and 352 BRD. These units where activated on 13 Dec 2002 and where in Kuwait in Jand 2003. The 402nd was mostly attached to the British with a small team attached to the Marines. 422 was one of the frist units into Baghdad while the 402nd worked the south with 486th. 411th was the fist unit to be activated under Operation Iraqi Freedom. The 402nd and 422 where activated under Operation Enduring Freedom becuase the war hadn't started. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.173.162.208 (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrade to B Class

This article requires more refs & citations for upgrade to B class. FieldMarine (talk) 23:51, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Civil affairs. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 15:02, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Civil affairs. 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/20100214014402/http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/02/marine_civil_affairs_020110w/ to http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/02/marine_civil_affairs_020110w/

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 11:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]