Talk:The Grey and Simcoe Foresters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST 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.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Canada / Ontario / Military (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the joint Canadian military and military history task force

Military units claiming an Alliance[edit]

I hope that the experience of others can provide me with some direction as I have searched several times and found no definitive answers.

I have been working on the Canadian Military unit The Grey and Simcoe Foresters. And, as with all Military unit pages, there is a heading of Alliances. This heading is what is confusing to me. Many Military units claim a Alliance with other Military units (and some rightly so), but I can find no reference sources for this type of claim in many cases. This is especially so for the case of a Forester unit (as there is only 1 other in the world that shares the Forester designation ... that being The Sherwood Foresters ). I don't want to add any additional implication of a link between the Units beyond their names by listing an Alliance.

Is it fair enough to simply remove the heading ?
Is there a reference source that I (non-military type that I am) am overlooking/missing ?
Is there a source where I might find info about the headings on Military units pages ?
exit2dos2000 11:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It is completely acceptable to leave out a section if you have nothing to add to it. Someone who knows more can always add things later. If you want to investigate further, the folks at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history, especially in their Canadian military history task force, are probably your best bet. (If you work on Canadian military units with any sort of regularity, you may just want to join as a participant.) - BanyanTree 17:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

End snip

Thanks Shimgray ... Thats the reference I was overlooking
exit2dos2000 09:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Note: Alliances between regiments within the Commonwealth are formal, following strict guidelines and customs and are personally approved by HM The Queen (27 May 2010)

References Please[edit]

I'm not sure I agree with the "Alliances" having a listing with the UK Foresters. Unless an actual reference to a formal "Alliance" can be shown or linked too, I feel that it is enough to just mention a similarity between the units. The term "Alliance" has another meaning in this context that I have never heard of existing between the 2 Forester units.

exit2dos2000 12:25, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Barreness of Grey and Simcoe Foresters entry[edit]

Not sure about the "public Domain"ness of the information, even though most of it is historical.

This round of Editing got only information from the WWW site into Wiki. More is to be forthcomming from several enlistment and informational pamphlets I picked up as well as conversations with "Specialists".

exit2dos2000 05:22, 3 September 2005 (UTC)