Talk:United States Army Training and Doctrine Command

Proposed Merger

I propose that Commanding General, United States Army Training and Doctrine Command be merged into this article. The other article adds nothing that cannot already be added into this article or is not already here, and this article already lists all of the commanders of the Command. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose - Someone could include a section in United States Army about the Chief of Staff, but that doesn't mean the position isn't worthy of its own article. A number of articles about Army divisions feature a section about commanders. (V Corps, 101st Airborne Division) Every unit has a commander, and creating a separate article is unnecessary. This case is different, however. The Commanding General, United States Army Training and Doctrine Command isn't just a four star position (which alone is a fairly good enough reason); it's also one of the most important positions in the Army. At the very least, it can be viewed as an equivalent to Navy commands like Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet and Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command, both of which have their own articles. Rockhead126 (talk) 05:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment - Adding onto my previous post and responding to Inks.LWC, United States Army Training and Doctrine Command does have a section on commanders. Before I put a main article template, the section was simply a list of names, with no insight into what the commander actually does. Now, rather than reading through a basic list, users researching TRADOC can both read about the duties of the commander and easily navigate a user friendly wikitable, something that would be difficult to include in the main article because of cluttering. Rockhead126 (talk) 06:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)