File talk:British Army No 2 Dress.jpg

This individual is not a member of the Parchchure Regiment. He was exposed as a fake - not the Sam Brown on the wrong way round and the ill fitting Trousers.Smidsy999 (talk) 08:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Please provide reliable sources as evidence. See also User talk:Smidsy999.  Happy ‑ melon  16:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Dress Regulations for The Army, JSP 336 and Parachute Regiment Dress Regulations for a start. If you wish to discuss further feel free to do so here http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=48629/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=8600.html. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smidsy999 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the best approach is probably to IfD this. The uniform is a p!ss poor representation, notwithstanding the faults with the wearing of it, it's scruffy.  That would save the angst all round.
 * Whilst I'd agree that it probably isn't a serving, or retired, soldier I'd be uncomfortable about using it to illustrate anything else without some evidence.
 * ALR (talk) 15:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Concur
 * Smidsy999 (talk) 16:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear: you have no evidence to confirm that "This individual is not a member of the Parchchure Regiment... He was exposed as a fake". Although the uniform errors you note are self-evident, it is synthesis to draw any conclusion other than that he is wearing his uniform incorrectly. I can see your argument (and sympathise to a certain extent) it would be inappropriate to take action based on an assumption about the subject's status. It is certainly inappropriate to use the image to illustrate topics such as "walts". I have to agree, therefore, that it would be better all round for this image (and its original on commons, perhaps?) to be deleted. Perhaps someone could suggest to User:Philip.t.day that he tag the images with ? If he doesn't want to do so, then an IfD would indeed be sensible; regardless of the provenance of the subject, the image itself has little encyclopedic value. Happy ‑ melon 17:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Sam Browne
fwiw if anyone is in any doubt about the SB being worn the wrong way round then it's visible here on the G&H website, quite clearly supposed to be worn over the right shoulder.

ALR (talk) 16:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)