Jump to content

Talk:Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No nick name is shown for the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. It has one of the most famous nick names in the British Army - The Thin Red Line - a name earned at the battle of Balaklava when the 93rd Sutherland Highlanders under Sir Colin Campbell stood in line formation and repelled the Russian cavalry heading for the British base at Balaklava. The Argylls are unique in the British Army as the only infantry regiment with the battle honour "Balaklava" - all of the other regiments with this honour being the cavalry regiments that made up the Heavy and Light Brigades.

[edit]

I'm adding links for as many individual Battalions as I can find using {{oob unit}}. These should probably be migrated to the articles for the Battalions themselves: please feel free to do this before I get around to it. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 11:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apropos of this, there are a bunch of "Volunteer Battalions" from which many of these arose: should we have links and/or articles for them? HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 11:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was the argyll and sutherland highlanders that performed the bayonett charge in afghanistan, not the princess of wales regiment.

Korean War

[edit]

The Korean War section consists of full account of the action on Hill 282, but nothing else; it's also more information than on any other action mentioned. Can I suggest that this is moved to a page entitled "Hill 282",or somesuch,with links to other pages on Korean war battles, and another paragraph be written to outline their involvement in the conflict? Any comments, or objections if I do this? Xyl 54 12:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done (finally!). Xyl 54 09:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The image Image:Scotbadge tn.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]

I propose to merge 2nd Battalion, Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders into this article to bring these into line with articles on most other post 1881 British Army regiments i.e. to discuss their post 1881 history in one place. The history of the 2nd battalion is not notable enough (see WP:SOLDIER) to currently merit a separate article. An article on the 1st battalion was redirected into this article in May 2011. NtheP (talk) 17:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, for me it would depend on the level of sourcing that is available. Some battalion-level organisations are notable enough for an article to be written on them. For instance, most Australian infantry battalions have had at least one, if not more, full books published on them. I imagine that it might be different in the UK, though, due to the larger scope of military operations that they have been involved in which means that historians may have used a "broader brush". Having said that, I note that many of the parachute battalions have their own articles, see for example Template:British airborne units of the Second World War. So, to cut a long story short, if there are sufficient sources that focus on the 2nd Battalion by itself, then it should probably stand alone. If not, then a merge seems appropriate. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:16, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, given the amount of detail currently on the page, I would say merge away. It can always be reseparated later. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:25, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

argylls in cyprus 1958

[edit]

ARGYLLS WERE IN CYPRUS IN 1958 . CYPRUS SHOULD BE NOTED TH D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.105.163.18 (talk) 23:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Balaklava error

[edit]

The article, in describing the 93rd's famous stand at Balaklava, says that the regiment:

"for the first time in the history of the British Army broke a large cavalry charge using musket fire alone, without having been formed into a square."

This is simply not true. British infantry broke the mass of French cavalry at the Battle of Minden in 1759, nearly one hundred years previously, with musketry. The Wiki article on the Battle of Minden states:

"Since the French cavalry was still in its ranks and the famous 'hollow square' had not yet been developed, it was assumed by all that the six leading British regiments were doomed. Despite being under constant artillery fire, the six regiments (soon supported by two Hannovarian battalions), by maintaining fierce discipline and closed ranks, drove off repeated cavalry charges with musket fire and inflicted serious casualties on the French. "

I'm sure I could find other examples, but this is the most famous. This is not an effort to diminish the 93rd's achievement, but simply to eliminate unnecessary and incorrect hyperbole.

Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Semonyenko (talk • contribs) 23:40, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WW2 Battalions

[edit]

Article mentions that 9 Btns were raised during WW2, which seems too high to me! I suspect that this figure includes some, if not all, of the Regt's Btns that were in existence prior to the war. [Obviously, if they were around pre-war, they weren't raised during the war.] The pre-war Btns were the 1st, 2nd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th & 11th. The 9th Btn had been converted to the 54th LAA Regt in 1938 (and duplicated pre-war to form the 58th LAA Regt).

According to Regiments.org, 7 Btns were raised during the war: 1939: 12th (Home Defence), 13th (Home Defence) & 14th (Home Defence) 1940: 15th, 50th (Holding) & 70th (Young Soldier) 1941: 30th

However, I suspect that, in 1940, the 50th Btn became the 15th Btn; and in 1941, the 14th Btn became the 30th Btn. In which case, there would only have been 5 war-formed Btns. [I was going to verify this using ordersofbattle.com, but this is currently unavailable - I hope its not lost for good.]

Of course Regiments.org (only archived copies are available) and ordersofbattle.com have errors, so it would be nice for someone to find a good source.Glevum (talk) 21:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to Bellis, Malcolm A. (1994). Regiments of the British Army 1939–1945 (Armour & Infantry). London: Military Press International. ISBN 0-85420-999-9. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • 1st and 2nd bns regular
  • 3rd and 4th bns Militia in suspended animation so do not count, I reckon
  • 5th Bn TA formed as duplicate of 5th/6th in 1939 (so, pre-war?)
  • 6th Bn TA renumbered from 5th/6th
  • 7th Bn TA
  • 8th Bn TA
  • 9th Bn TA converted to 54th LAA in 1938
  • 10th Bn TA formed as duplicate of 7th in 1939 (so, pre-war?)
  • 11th Bn TA formed as duplicate of 8th in 1939 (so, pre-war?)
  • 12th Bn formed November 1939 from part of No. 63 Group NDC for Home Defence; redesignated as 30th Bn in December 1941
  • 13th Bn formed December 1939 from part of No. 63 Group NDC for Home Defence; absorbed in 12th Bn August 1940
  • 14th Bn formed December 1939 from No. 65 and 75 Groups NDC for Home Defence; disbanded October 1940
  • 15th Bn formed May 1940 by redesignation of 50th (Holding) Bn
  • 30th renumbered from 12th (HD) Bn December 1941; disbanded January 1943
  • 70th Bn formed September 1940 as Young Soldier Bn from companies of 13th (HD) ASH, 14th (HD) ASH, 10th (HD) RSF
Note no mention of when 50th (Holding) Bn was formed.
So, 8 pre-war: 1st, 2nd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 11th
and 5 War-formed: 12th (30th), 13th, 14th, 50th (15th), 70th

Hamish59 (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another thought: possibly counting the 3 duplicate TA Bns as "war-formed". In fairness, they were formed in 1939 (duplication of TA as a result of the Munich Crisis) in the expectation of a new European war. Hamish59 (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:55, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2007 structure

[edit]

Is this really needed?

Battalion Structure 2007:[1]

  • A "Argylls" Company
  • B "The Jocks" Company
    • 5 Platoon
  1. ^ "5 SCOTS (Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders)". 2008-10-13. Retrieved 2018-09-24.

Sammartinlai (talk) 07:37, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that it does not help and should be removed. Dormskirk (talk) 16:59, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Argyll_and_Sutherland_Highlanders&oldid=1198953054"