Talk:Mountain Leader Training Cadre

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

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

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Untitled

This page has been changed drastically so as to reduce the quality and reliabiity of it. The name was changed to a wrong and mis-leading version, in direct contradiction to the Royal navy. Why? Tashtastic 11:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to track down something authoritative with respect to the name, however I would dispute that the content is not an improvement on what was done before.ALR 13:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's not simple. I've managed to find reference in the Pay regulations. The qualified personnel are the MAWC, the process to get there appears to be MLTC. There is also a third band, over ML1 and ML2, that of ML. I'm not sure, since I can't find anything to corroborate, but it looks as if Officers are MLs and ORs are ML2 and ML1. The rates of special pay appear to be different for the three.ALR 13:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The content is not an improvement and the quality is now reduced. You still didn't explain why you changed the name of it in direct contradiction to the royal navy . If the process is called "MLTC", why not stick with the name the personnel have always and still are called? Tashtastic 16:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be specific about where you believe adding material on the training and employment of MLs has degraded its quality? As ever I'm open to constructive comment which allows us to move forward with the development of the article in order to improve its utility to the casual reader. ALR 17:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

terminology

Whats 'RTI'? (in norway exercises bit) --maxrspct ping me 20:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resistance to Interrogation. It's explained two lines above.

ALR 20:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh yes,.. i did look for it. Thanks! --maxrspct ping me 19:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or better link

This article could well be merged with the Mountain Leader article - someone with direct expertise needs to get a grip of both. Jeremy Bolwell (talk) 14:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ML is a generic article, this is about the cadre which trains Royal, there is no good reason for merging. OTOH the ML article reads like a straight cut and paste from somewhere else so I've culled a lot of that. We could potentially port some of the history from there over here.

ALR (talk) 15:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how helpful this is, and I surely don't want to enter COI grounds (having been already unfortunately bruised there) but as a former Cliff Leader 2 (in 1957), and for a short time Officer-in-Charge of the basic training part of the Cliff Assault Wing at the Commando School, RM Bickleigh, Devon (and Sennen Cove, Cornwall) under Colonel Mike Banks, and also actually as leader of a Tattoo team which publicly demonstrated these techniques before they were stopped as a result of the New York accident, I am trying to amass reliable and verifiable evidence from former colleagues, but unfortunately am so far unable to find much other than personal experience... However at the least, I can personally vouch for the factual accuracy of the referenced account... although I know that is not enough for the project, so am working on getting some more objective information. This was a fascinating and unusual group of folks, worth chronicling in my view... Jeslw (talk) 17:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]