Talk:Para (Special Forces)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Merge (2006)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Para Commandoes + Parachute Regiment

There is a basic difference between the Parachute Regiment and the Para Cdo. The Paras are Airborne Infantry tps whereas the Para CDos are Special Forces lihe the MARCOS & US Navy SEALS. Both are trained to very high standards; but have differing op roles, employability and training.callmetarantula

There's a lot of background and origins info in the page Parachute Regiment (India), but seems to be unreferenced and not very well structured.

This page is well structured but could also do with some of the background info that is contained in the page Parachute regiment page since they're on the same subject. I am proposing a merger. Ranam 15:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Para Commandos indicates a specialty in the Indian Army. The Parachute Regiment is an individual regiment which needs its own seperate page Hammersfan 20.20 BST, 10/9/06

• Merge Para Commandos are part of the Parachute Regiment. jaiiaf 19:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

though the Para Cdos are part of the Parachute regiment. but they consider themselves a breed apart, and they are right in doing so. they only wear the maroon beret common to all paratroopers in the indian army. but they are far better than the normal airborne units. so the two articles should remain sperate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.94.98.105 (talk • contribs)

• Oppose I don't think we should merge the two. Although the Para Commandos are part of the Parachute Regiment, they are a Special Forces entity within the Indian Army. The Para Commandos undertake special operations not entirely undertaken by the Parachute Regiment. Also, only the Commandos wear the "Balidan" badge which is conferred when a commando completes one year of duty with in the Battalion. The training that a Commando undergoes is different from the training a normal paratrooper undergoes. In another army with a Special Forces Command, the Commandos would be given their own name and regiment.

• Oppose India isn't the only country to have units called 'para commandos'. I believe that Belgium has (had?) para commando units. --Nick Dowling 07:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• I believe Para Commandos should be a disambiguation page, with...

Para Commandos (Belgium)

Para Commandos (India)

and any other nation's unit called 'Para Commandos'? Chwyatt 08:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Disambig page

As per discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Para Commandos , i am moving this article to Para Commandos (India). -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 12:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CommandoPatch.jpg

Image:CommandoPatch.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Sources

Where are the sources for the actions of para commandos? These all may be true, but I'm unable to figure out the source, can somebody tell me? Anurag2k12 (talk) 19:57, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I am guessing that the editor adding these added them from memory/blog/defence magazine, and didn't matter adding sources. A citation needed tag is needed for the sections. I have tried to locate sources for some, some wikilinks to the operation main articles. Hope you can add more. Thanks! Anir1uph (talk) 06:08, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced shite

Please do not add nor revert content into this article in violation of WP:V. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Contrary to popular belief I am not a total wanker, see Prepare Or Perish: A Study of National Security Lancer p214 to cover some of what I reverted out. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Operation Blue Star

What does "the conventional manner of the raid and the lack of incentive as to not hurt the Sikh sentiment" mean?Royalcourtier (talk) 07:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Article Name needs Changing

'Para Commandos' are currently referred to as 'Special Forces' and sometimes 'Para-Special Forces' or 'Para-SF', something which is reflected in the Parachute Regiment (India) article and what I believe is the Parachute Regiments official website, along with articles like these: [1], [2], [3] Myopia123 (talk) 22:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 20 October 2014

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page to Para (Indian Special Forces), per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 04:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Para Commandos (India) → Para (Special Forces) – 'Para Commandos' are currently referred to as 'Para (Special Forces)' and sometimes 'Para-SF', something which is reflected in the Parachute Regiment (India) article and what I believe is the Parachute Regiments official website, along with articles like these: [4], [5], [6] – .Para Commandos (India) is about the Special Forces of the Parachute Regiment. These special forces used to be referred to as 'Para Commandos' but were renamed as Para Special Forces, as stated in the links above AND in the Parachute Regiment (India) article in "Strength" section. The pictures in the article are of 9 Para Battalion, which is designated as a Para (Special Forces) battalion in the Parachute Regiment (India). 'Para Commandos' no longer exist in the Indian Army. They are all 'Para Special Forces'. – Myopia123 (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Object to speedy move request. I think this should have a discussion. Special Forces is not an Indian military article, and several "Para"s are special forces units that are not from India. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 20:02, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Survey

• Please read the links. Your information is incorrect. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th and 21st Battalions of the Parachute Regiment (India) are referred to as Para (Special Forces), as shown in Parachute Regiment (India). Also, this image File:PARA Commandos.jpg clearly shows members of the 9th Parachute Battalion referring to themselves as SF, short for Special Forces.

I believe I have provided sufficient information from Reliable Sources, including the Parachute Regiment's own website. This is purely a technical matter.Myopia123 (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

• Also I do not understand your point, IP Poster 67.70.35.44. I am not suggesting a move to Special Forces. This move is effectively renaming 'Para Commandos' to 'Para (Special Forces)' which is, in effect, just a correction of an incorrect name. Like I said above, Para Commandos are no longer call 'Para Commandos' in the Indian Army. They wear a 'Special Forces' tab and are referred to as 'Para (Special Force)' and all of this info is ALREADY in this article. All that needs to be done is change the (incorrect) title to a correct one.Myopia123 (talk) 22:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
• In case you are having trouble getting this far here is a wikilink Parachute Regiment (India)#Strength. And don't forget the links I have included in the first paragraph of this section. They state this change in nomenclature very clearly. Myopia123 (talk) 01:09, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • (1) "Special Forces" does not mean India, so cannot be used for disambiguation about India if any other special forces are called "Para" (2) there are other special forces that are "Para" which are not from India (3) this results in ambiguous disambiguation. The proposed title fails WP:PRECISE. (4) to remedy that situation, you can use Para (Special Forces of India) instead. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 03:18, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose as proposed (as stated in my objection at WP:RMTR) The Nominator fails to see that India is not the only country in the world to have special forces called "Para", so "Para (Special Forces)" is not unique to India, and is ambiguous disambiguation, thus failing WP:PRECISE. It has nothing to do with India calling its units "Para" or that they are "Special Forces". The combination of "Para (Special Forces)" is ambiguous, and should not be used. It needs additional specification, such as including "India" or "Indian" in the disambiguator. ie) Para (Special Forces of India) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 03:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• Sure. I see nothing wrong with Para (Special Forces)(India) or some other appropriate iteration of the sort. My point here is that 'Para Commandos' is no longer the technically correct term for this article. Just like UDT would no longer be the correct title for Navy SEALs. Myopia123 (talk) 03:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• So do I have to make another move request for Para (Special Forces)(India) or can it be moved to Para (Special Forces)(India) with this one? Myopia123 (talk) 01:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
• The Parachute Regiment (United Kingdom) are often called the Paras and they are special forces. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
• The Parachute Regiment (India) are also called Paras and they have battalions within the regiment which used to be designated 'Commandos', which is what this article talks about, but are now called 'Special forces'. What is the purpose of bringing up the UK regiment? Myopia123 (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
• If this page is moved to merely Para (Special Forces), it would claim dominance over other forces called Paras including the Parachute Regiment (United Kingdom), who likely include members who have Wikipedia access and would have things to say, or do, about it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:43, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
• If you read the conversation above, you will see that consensus was reached that the page should be Para (Special Forces)(India). In any case, 'Para Commandos' is an archaic term, as I have stated multiple times with RS's. The correct term for them now is Para (Special Forces) and therefore the page should be moved to Para (Special Forces)(India)Myopia123 (talk) 01:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
• And according to the UK Parachute Regiment Article 1 PARA is a part of Special Forces Support Group and the 2 and 3 PARA are Parachute Infantry. Therefore I do not see how an article named Para (Special Forces)(India) affects the UK regiment at all.Myopia123 (talk) 01:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed merge with Indian Army Para (Special Forces) selection

Not enough content to stand on its own and based largely on a tv show. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I have made a couple of changes to the page in consideration. @Adamgerber80: Do you still think the merge is needed?

Can't you also try helping to sort out the page rather than suggest a merge? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 01:10, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan I think the article Indian Army Para (Special Forces) selection does not meet WP:GNG on it's own. It has a lot of issues including the use of WP:SPS. The best we can do as of now is to merge it into this article in my opinion. Adamgerber80 (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: Since no one else has commented on the proposed merge, how do we sort this out now? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 09:00, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: I can nominate the page for WP:XFD and have the community decide. I still strongly feel that the page does not have enough to standalone. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:40, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: Yes, please do so, nominate it and lets see what happens. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Relating to Adamgerber80 and Undid revision 829299768 by DiplomatTesterMan and Operation Sarp Vinash

Hello @Adamgerber80:. So this is what was undone by you -
Other operations
The Para (Special Forces) have been involved in various other operations such as Operation Sarp Vinash in Jammu and Kashmir in 2003. For this operation Sanjog Chhetri of the 9 PARA (Special Forces) was posthumously awarded the Ashoka Chakra.
Old Revision History - https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Para_(Special_Forces)&oldid=829299768
This had three links to other pages in wikipedia such as Operation Sarp Vinash and Sanjog Chhetri. Now before making this change on this page I had expanded those pages with relevant citations. I saw that it was missing on the Para (SF) page so I decided to add it. Now I did add the links but yes, I forgot to add citations. But this was an honest overlook and I really think anyone else could have also added at least one more citation since the links were already provided if it being unsourced was the criteria for removal. Nevertheless, considering all guidelines the relevant citations for this are easily accessible already on Operation Sarp Vinash and Sanjog Chhetri wiki pages relevant this para sf page.

So now can I add back the line and heading since there are enough citations and I won't forget to put them now? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 18:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan Always remember to add references with your content. Please add it with the appropriate subtitle. I also feel that the Operation Sarp Vinash page does not have enough notability of it's own to standalone as a single page and should be merged with this one. Adamgerber80 (talk) 16:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Bluestar reference

Hi @DBigXray:, I am not sure if youtube in general, and that one in particular is an acceptable source here. We might have to look for another source, ideally a book given the timeline. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:26, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for your coment. Kindly understand that Youtube as such is not the source of the information here. The source of the said information is the Interview of the Person concerned and his interview is the published source. Youtube here is merely added for VERIFIABILITY purpose (like an archive) . If we find a better source for the said information, we can of course replace this citation with a better one. As of now it is the only one and The concerned person was the Army officer leading the commando team that participated in the Operation. His claim regarding the participating teams is acceptable I believe and a WP:RS for the said piece of information. If you are convinced, may i request you to restore the source or replace it with a better one. I am open for further discussion, but this is all I had to say.--DBigXray 20:31, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

@DBigXray: I am not sufficiently convinced that youtube will work as an acceptable source here. Video or TV interviews in general are not that great and unless we find a written transcript of that content, we should not add it. If we cannot find a written source then we might have to remove it. I will have a look and see if I can find some sources on the Para participation during Operation Bluestar. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• I am assuming the Army's white paper and KS Brar's book should definately have this info. as I said above the youtube link is merely for virifiability. The real source is the TV Documentary that includes the interview and is straight from the horse's mouth.--DBigXray 21:18, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I am not sure which documentary are you referring to. Is it Operation Blue Star and the assassination of Indira Gandhi (2013)? Then, we cannot take the documentary itself as a reference. I am happy to take this to WP:RSN to check with people there whether video documentaries (released on youtube) are acceptable references. Adamgerber80 (talk) 21:21, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

• This Interview in the TV documentary published in Television Media is a perfectly valid reliable source for a non controversial claim as this about intervention of this force. This is "also" available on Youtube, does not mean it was published only on Youtube. there is a clear difference. You can get the opinion on RSN if you are in a doubt. I have also found another news source Mint and added it back. --DBigXray 20:43, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I still maintain that you cannot take a documentary and consider it a WP:RS even for a "non-controversial" claim. I will open a request on WP:RSN for this. Adamgerber80 (talk) 06:20, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Archive 1