Talk:Delta Force

ACE moniker

@TristanHeller:: Please stop reinserting the claim that Delta is also known as ACE/Army Compartmentalized Elements, into the lede of the article. As we've already established in the body, that reporting comes from a single source in 2010, (Marc Ambinder, of the Atlantic) who subsequently rescinded the claim as being a mistake. Notably, none of the expert authorities on Delta (Ambinder, Harp, Naylor, Haney etc.) claim this is or was Delta's name. Further, no former Unit members or operational support have ever come forth saying that was the name (e.g. Van Sant, Glover, McPhee, etc.). There are no reliable sources independently verifying the claim that ACE is, or was, officially a name of the unit (and certainly none separately and independently from Ambinder's now retracted claim). You've provided nothing but unreliable sources thus far.

• Britannica is not usable as a source in this case per WP:BRITANNICA
• American Special Ops is not a reliable source, lacking any of the typical indicia of reliability and does not unambiguously make the claim that Delta was ever referred to this way other than as rumor ("This super-secretive outfit goes by / has been rumored to have used various names:").
• GenDischarge is also not a reliable source; also lacking any indicia of reliability, it is primarily a commercial retailer, blog, and youtube channel that explicitly disclaims responsibility for the content it posts (much of which is AI generated).

You need to stop disrupting this article by repeatedly introducing factual errors. You got off to a bad start with misidentifying Bill Cronin as Mike Vining, despite us having a FAQ explicitly on that point right here on this page, which you claimed did not exist; you're now using unreliable sources to push an unsubstantiated claim into the lede of the article, which contradicts the reporting of reliable sources already in the body of the article. I'm not sure what kind of POV you're trying to push here, but you should not be starting from the perspective of "I want to put this thing in the lede" and then scraping the bottom of the barrel for any scrap of a source you can find to justify it; we should be reporting only what reliable sourcing says in the first place, in accordance with our pillars, not seeking to center our own voices here. And you're not going to get anywhere lecturing an administrator with nearly two decades of experience on this project about when reverting is appropriate or not, certainly not by linking an essay that holds no weight or binding authority. Knock it off. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 17:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) "We established" doesn't make a source unreliable as per policy. I also, have never stated that a FAQ page didn't exist, go back and read the summary before framing me again. I get it that you might be feeling a little offended because a small peasant like me dared to make changes in open-sourced encyclopedia, on a article you're holding hostage by abusing your administrative priveleges. "CAG" and "Delta" were the only confirmed cover names by officials, of the unit. The unit, along with devgru and some other JSOC elements never had "official" names as per their nature, even the pentagon refuses to comment about their designition. You'd expect that a "administrator with almost 2 decades of experience" would be aware of this fact, but guess not. (Personal attack removed) TristanHeller (talk) 16:10, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Seeing as you've already been blocked for the personal attacks, I'm not going to warn you another time about those -- but I will speak to your claim that you "have never stated that a FAQ page didn't exist" -- I said that you stated that the *talk page* (which contains the FAQ) didn't exist. That is demonstrably a fact as you can see from this diff: (There isn't even a talk page of this article). So no, gaslighting isn't going to work here and if you continue casting aspersions it's not gonna end well for you. On that note: on the substance of claiming that JSOC units "never had 'official' names as per their nature", that's simply just flat wrong, and not backed by literally any of the scholarship on JSOC. Haney disagrees with you. Naylor disagrees with you. Marcinko, who literally founded what's now DEVGRU, is dead but he'd disagree with you too. What you're referring to as a "fact" is simply complete nonsense. Here's several examples right here, including DEVGRU. See also, NAVAL SPECIAL WARFARE NWP 3-05 pages 2-11 to 2-12. You'll find the same with Delta/CAG on the USASOC side (see, e.g. Permanent Orders 137-33 17 May 2011 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment - Delta). It's difficult enough to cover special operations units by their nature; introducing Hollywood myths into the discussion, whether that's due to a lack of familiarity with the subject matter or otherwise, is eminently unhelpful. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 18:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)