Talk:Household Cavalry
Latest comment: 6 months ago by Martinevans123 in topic Nicknames in the infobox
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Household Cavalry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Officer ranks broken?
editThe section on officer ranks seems incomplete and broken. Is that intentional? 2001:9E8:29D0:8500:80E1:2CBD:E8CC:87E3 (talk) 12:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Now sorted. Dormskirk (talk) 12:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
April 2024 London incident
editRe: the removal here as WP:NOTNEWS, I might agree that, for a military organisation dating back to 1660, this event may not have been very notable. But how often does the Household Cavalry make the news? This incident received global media coverage. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. It received huge coverage and should be restored. Dormskirk (talk) 09:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Now restored. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think that it's WP:UNDUE. There may have been a lot of rather breathless coverage in the media, but it's still only a single incident
- More important though is the state of the 'Place in British society" section entirely. It's uncited apart from one very poor source, and is basically of load of OR of very questionable accuracy. 31.218.19.119 (talk) 13:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- So the source citations for the April 2024 incident can very easily be added to/improved. What does Dormskirk think? But by all means highlight which material you think is unsourced. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wasn't clear - I mean the preceding paragraph in that section, not the bit you added on the London incident 31.218.19.119 (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that the first paragraph is very much a series of opinions (e.g. "The two regiments of the Household Cavalry are regarded as the most prestigious in the British Army...") and would be relaxed if that paragraph was removed. Dormskirk (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- So the source citations for the April 2024 incident can very easily be added to/improved. What does Dormskirk think? But by all means highlight which material you think is unsourced. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Now restored. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Nicknames in the infobox
editWhile sourced, it seems these are very obscure, and there's nothing supporting their noteworthiness in the article. I don't think nicknames without widespread use and coverage in the actual article should be in the infobox. 31.218.19.119 (talk) 13:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Tend to agree. They seem to be largely historical. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC)