Talk:Staff Officer

Removal of S-5 (Army)

24.225.152.205 made a contribution on 11:46, 10 March 2007 by adding "S-5" as the unit's "Executive Officer." However, this is incorrect. Although every unit at the company level and higher has an executive officer, he or she is not the "S-5". The S-5 was originally used to refer to a unit's Civil Affairs officer; this practice was phased out after Vietnam and civil affairs officers are no longer routinely assigned to battalion and brigade level staffs. Later, the unit staff level need for a communications officer resulted in the S-6 position being routinely added to battalion and brigade staffs. Hence, a unit usually has an S-1, S-2, S-3, S-4, and S-6, but no S-5, and the unit's executive officer is ordinarily referred to as the "XO." See Headquarters and Headquarters Company for more information on a typical US Army staff headquarters unit. -- AzureCitizen 15:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Staff Noncommissioned Officer

The Staff Noncommissioned Officer article is a stub. It also deals with a specific type of Staff Officer. It should be merged with this article.

Neelix (talk) 13:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Geoff NoNick (talk) 14:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree; Staff Officers and Staff NCOs are not a related subject. Staff NCOs are mentioned, like they should be, in the NCO article under United States. --< Nicht Nein! (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Right. SNCO is USMC, is a specific group of ranks, and may be found doing any assignment consistent with those ranks, while Staff Officer isn't any particular rank or any particular country or service, but is a type of assignment. They are two different ways of classifying people. One is not a species of the other, any more than a racehorse is a species of sawhorse or vice versa. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Disagree; A merge would be very confusing. Staff Officer is deserving of a article all on its own. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 12:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

---

By command of the emperor is twice in the literature list, one reference should be removed. Lastdingo (talk) 16:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Expansion template

Why make bigger? To duplicate what is already said better in Staff (military)? Jim.henderson (talk) 02:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)