Talk:William B. Caldwell IV

Verbatim unsourced bio
The bio on this page is a verbatim copy of ELEVEN paragraphs without attribution, from an article entitled "Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV: Senior Military Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense," by Casie Vinall, Special to American Forces Press Service. The article is available online here.

As it stands now, this is unequivocally plagiarism; given the amount of text reproduced, even adding the proper attribution will probably not be sufficient. I strongly recommend removing the page until this issue is addressed.

As an aside, a page on Maj. Gen. Caldwell should include that the first "Deputy Secretary of Defense" for whom he worked was Paul Wolfowitz. Clearly, this is an historically significant fact of Caldwell's career.

Finally, I apologize for adding such a strong comment, despite being unable to work on this project myself. I just happened across this Wiki page while researching Caldwell, immediately after reading the defenselink.mil article mentioned above. Todd Johnston 23:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * DoD websites are public domain, hence they can be copied verbatim.--Nobunaga24 00:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * My apologies, and I stand corrected. I momentarily spaced on the .mil tld, i.e. the content existing in the public domain. However, because the article does provide an author, it would certainly be polite to include an attribution. And, even though works in the public domain are not protected by copyrights, altering these works can, in certain cases, violate a person's "moral rights" and/or fall under forgery, fraud, and libel laws.


 * Again, sorry, and thanks for being polite about my brain fart. --Todd Johnston 03:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Can someone include the field manuals that Lt. Gen. Caldwell has worked on? He published a field manual recently, which he spoke about on The Daily Show today (10Mar2008). I imagine that it was a strategic manual for counterinsurgency. I hope that someone who knows will include this information.--Beezer137 (talk) 03:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The field manual which was discussed on The Daily Show can be found on the Fort Leavenworth website, FM 3-0 Operations, February 2008, as well as a recorded video file of his segment in .wmv format here LTG Caldwell on The Daily Show -Signaleer (talk) 20:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

who do I send the Generals most current command photo to so that it can be uploaded to this page Ntma (talk) 11:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Command Photo
who do can i send the Generals new command photo to so that I can get this page updated Ntma (talk) 11:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Updating the article
I have come out of "retirement" from Wikipedia and plan to make some changes to this article. My goal is to increase the credibility of this article, reorganize the existing content and cite credible references for the information. If you have any comments or concerns please contact me on my user talk page, I have outlined in my personal sandbox a rough draft (Note: this is my personal sandbox, do not make changes to this userpage, comments are welcomed on my user talk page in reference to this sandbox. -Signaleer (talk) 20:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If anyone would like to make constructive changes on my sandbox page in reference to this article, please click the link that will take you to User:Signaleer/Sandbox/Caldwell for the sandbox for Lt. Gen. Caldwell. Input would be most appreciated.  -Signaleer (talk) 19:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could deal with this sort of stuff: "During his deployment to Iraq, Caldwell earned the respect and admiration of both national and international media for his candid assessments of the situation in Iraq and for his responsiveness to the needs of the press"

and compare it to:

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/8/1/congressional_probe_reveals_cover_up_of — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.215.219 (talk) 02:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Rolling Stone "psy-ops" controversy
These guys were NOT, I say again, NOT PSYOP. There are no PSYOP units assigned to or supporting CSTC-A. The lieutenant colonel involved is a military intelligence officer on assignment from the Texas National Guard who has some background in "information operations", which is NOT the same thing as psychological operations no matter how much some IO types think they are.

There will be a lot more reliably sourced information besides Rolling Stones' hackery coming out about this shortly.74.193.234.233 (talk) 00:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * In any case, I've now removed it twice, and I take it you support the removal. Several editors have added it in, but since we are talking about an allegation that has not yet been investigated, we should keep all of this material over at 2009 congressional delegation to Afghanistan where it belongs as a proper subsection of Psychological Operations (United States).  BLP articles should be kept stable, especially when we have unproven allegations without evidence.  We should wait until the investigation has concluded to determine whether to add it here.  For the moment, I've placed a link in the see also, which I think is sufficient. Viriditas (talk) 23:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Mischaracterization of Service
Numerous edits claim that the incident at Dawood Hospital ended LTG Caldwell's career. This is incorrect. LTG Caldwell had already planned to retire around the time he assumed command of US Army North (early 2012). He submitted his paperwork to retire in November 2012, and was selected by Georgia Military College in Feb 2013...months before the investigation was concluded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrispinBurke (talk • contribs) 00:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Added a reference to an Army Times story at the time of Caldwell's retirement, which quotes an Army spokesman as stating that Caldwell's retirement request came with the knowledge that the investigation's findings would prevent him from being promoted or receiving any further positions of responsibility. He may have submitted his paperwork in Nov 2012 (I can't find a citation for this), well before the investigation's report came out in August 2013, but the investigation was clearly well underway in mid/late 2012 (congressional hearings in mid-2012). BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Information
This is twice has deemed my edits to William B. Caldwell to be "vandalism." I'm hoping they can explain why they believe that good faith edits to improve the flow of an article, trim non-NPOV language, and remove an entirely superfluous bibliography of pretty much everything the subject ever had published, constitute "vandalism"? If they have actual specific objections, I'd be happy to hear them. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 20:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)


 * To review, you have made two major edits to this article:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_B._Caldwell&type=revision&diff=922641764&oldid=918256563&diffmode=visual
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_B._Caldwell&type=revision&diff=922830087&oldid=922744212&diffmode=visual


 * These two edits has significant changes, which includes the removal of significant images and relavent biographical information with . I have no issues with trimming the article and removing the Bibliography section. I am familiar with the following Wiki policies: WP:VD, WP:GF, WP:EW, WP:3RR, and WP:AC. -Signaleer (talk) 14:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)