Talk:1st Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Brigade/Archive 1

clarify?
- you removed a chunk of sourced content, but your edit summary only says "update". Can you clarify this? Thanks - the WOLF  child  01:57, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Read the deleted text Blackshod (talk) 20:25, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * - A, that's not how it works. B, you don't revert again until after you and I and anyone else who cares to comment on this agrees that your edit is the correct and best way to go. So, again... why are you blanking out sourced content? (repeatedly, and without explanation) Thank you - the WOLF  child  22:37, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Posting patently outdated information is hardly useful, there is a preview feature on wiki, please use it. Blackshod (talk) 19:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This has nothing to do with the "preview feature" and everything to do with your crappy attitude and refusal to communicate. Again, why remove the content completely? Why not simply update that entry with the latest information in the 'notes' column, preferreably with a ref or a link? - the WOLF  child  02:40, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Clearly Blackshod is correct. BlueD954 (talk) 08:50, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * This isn't about whether the information was correct, but how he went about editing it, which was entirely incorrect. That and the crappy attitude are not helpful. -  wolf 

Isn't there a repetition of its orbat?
A table and then a list of similar units? Either have one or none. Sammartinlai (talk) 15:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I mean this

1st Intelligence and Surveillance Brigade - Upavon

 * 5th (Yorkshire) Regiment, Royal Artillery - Surveillance and Target Acquisition
 * Q (Sanna's Post) Battery - Headquarters
 * 4/73 (Sphinx) Special Observation Post Battery - Observation Battery
 * 53 (Louisburg) Battery - Air Assault Surveillance and Target Acquisition Battery
 * 93 (Le Cateau) Battery - Surveillance and Target Acquisition Battery
 * K (Hondeghem) Battery - Surveillance and Target Acquisition Battery
 * P Battery (The Dragon Troop) - Surveillance and Target Acquisition Battery
 * Honourable Artillery Company - Reserves Surveillance and Target Acquisition
 * Headquarters Troop
 * 1 Squadron - Battalion sized Surveillance and Target Acquisition Unit
 * 2 Squadron - Battalion sized Surveillance and Target Acquisition Unit
 * 3 Squadron - Battalion sized Surveillance and Target Acquisition Unit
 * 47th (Hampshire and Sussex) Regiment, Royal Artillery - UAV Control Artillery Regiment
 * 30 Battery (Rogers's Company) - UAV Control Battery
 * 10 (Assaye) Battery - UAV Control Battery
 * 43 (Lloy's Company) Battery - UAV Control Battery
 * 74 Battery (The Battle Axe Company) - UAV Control Battery
 * 14 Signal Regiment (Electronic Warfare)
 * 223 Signal Squadron
 * 226 Signal Squadron
 * 237 Signal Squadron
 * 245 Signal Squadron
 * JESC Troop
 * 1st Military Intelligence Battalion
 * 3rd Military Intelligence Battalion
 * 5th Military Intelligence Battalion
 * 2nd Military Intelligence Battalion
 * 6th Military Intelligence Battalion
 * 4th Military Intelligence Battalion
 * 7th Military Intelligence Battalion

New Signal Regiment under 1 ISR Brigade
13th Signal Regiment

https://royalsignals.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/20170921-Master-of-Signals-Presentation.pdf

Sammartinlai (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , good spotting!! Should get you a barnstar for this. Appears to have the same role as 14th Signal Regiment and to be based at the same place as 299 Sigs Squadron (SC).., any thoughts? Buckshot06 (talk) 19:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, good spot. I agree that the slides suggest that the role is the same. Dormskirk (talk) 19:40, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Regiment not up yet hence I placed it here. How they will man it will be a miracle. Sammartinlai (talk) 02:13, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It was your spotting Sammartinlai, do you want to add some notes to Royal Corps of Signals or shall I? EW has become a higher priority for NATO since the War in Donbas began... Buckshot06 (talk) 09:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe I already did, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Corps_of_Signals#The_Future. Sammartinlai (talk) 09:49, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Army Briefing Note how do we know this is a reliable source? Compare to Force Troops Command Handbook
"Army Briefing Note 120/14, Newly Formed Force Troops Command Specialist Brigades: "It commands all of the Army’s Intelligence, Surveillance and EW assets, and is made up of units specifically from the former 1 MI Bde and 1 Arty Bde, as well as 14 Sig Regt, 21 and 23 SAS(R)."

While this appears at first look to be a reference, it has no link or original source to prove 21 and 23 SAS are, as of 2019, part of the 1ISR Brigade. Anyone can write this a source. Where is the official link or source? Surely this is origianl research and dated in 2014. Check out

Compare to the Force Troops Command Handbook, uploaded here on the official British Army website. No mention at all of 21 or 23 or both units under the list of units under 11SR Brigade.

BlueD954 (talk) 07:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, you dont edit war, just because one source doesn't support the content. Adding more sources that... also don't support the content (?)... doesn't help either. Several Wikipedia articles, including;
 * Artists Rifles (21st Special Air Service Regiment (Reserve))
 * 23 Special Air Service Regiment (Reserve)
 * United Kingdom Special Forces
 * Director Special Forces
 * British Army
 * all state or list both the 21 & 23 SAS as being a part of 1 ISR Bde. They also all have sources. It would be helpful if, instead of adding additional 'non-sources' that don't support the entries, or adding incorrect tags, or edit-warring and posting snarky edit summaries (1,2, 3,4, 5 - btw, no one here is obligated to "prove" anything to you. That's not how this works)... why not just do what you can to improve the content & sourcing? (and therefore improve the page?). Have you checked any of these refs attached to the 21/23 SAS entries on the articles listed above? Have you checked the other source on this page; Jane's International Defence Review". May 2014. p. 4...? How about being less confrontational and more collaborative? It would certainly be beneficial for the project, right? Thanks and have a nice day. - wolf  11:48, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * How about you talking about yourself now that you are blocked. Clearly you don't respond to my arguments at all. I question the source Army Briefing Note 120/14. Clear you have no argument.BlueD954 (talk) 08:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I have proven beyond reasonable doubt you are wrong. BlueD954 (talk) 08:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * To blocked user thewolfchild, there are so many mistakes in the 1ISR Bde link. 104th Regiment RA is no longer under their command, as with 74 Battery. So you think, if you bother, is that reliable compared to the 2019 FTC handbook? All you sources are from 3014 and you have been clutching at straws. So don't accuse me of any edit war, especially given your inability to see facts and your block history.BlueD954 (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The only thing you've proven is that you are a repetitive, unrepentant sock-puppet who has now been indef'd for same. Again. -  wolf 

So, what do we do, given the diff between the two supposedly-current official sources, the Ministry of Defence website (undated, but must be 2014+) and the Force Troops Command Handbook (PDF dated 2019-01-31)? —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 07:26, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Army Briefing Notes are internal British Army circulation documents which are intended to advise the Army & its community; not outsiders. With the right permissions you could see them on the Army intranet. They're not posted on the open web. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
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) 15:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Insigne du 1st Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Brigade (1 ISR Bde).svg

Name calling
81.108.136.100 called me a weirdo just because I removed his unsourced, and not reasonable line ['https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1st_Intelligence%2C_Surveillance_and_Reconnaissance_Brigade&type=revision&diff=974840173&oldid=970849352]. I have reported him or her.

BlueD954 (talk) 01:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)