Talk:29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery

Untitled
I'm intending on migrating some of the 148 Battery material across, with regard to training.

If anyone has corresponding material on the REME workshop that would be useful.ALR 14:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement
I have just completed the B class checklist and believe that the article could be improved by addressing the following issues:


 * referencing: in line citations - at least one per paragraph for B class;
 * coverage: a history section could be included, current operations, COs, etc;
 * supporting materials: images and or an infobox.

Just some ideas. Hope this helps. AustralianRupert (talk) 01:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 29th Commando Regiment Royal Artillery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140829015853/http://army.mod.uk/artillery/regiments/31246.aspx to http://www.army.mod.uk/artillery/regiments/31246.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Fantastic< thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timlyons29commando (talk • contribs) 16:48, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 30 December 2022

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved. UtherSRG (talk) 19:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

29th Commando Regiment Royal Artillery → 29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery – The title "29th" is not used - see the Royal Navy website here: []. "29 Commando" is the most commonly used name. I believe this is uncontroversial - we just have the redirect and the page the wrong way round. The naming of regiments etc between the Nth and the N is reasonably random, so there are no wider implications for other articles. Please see also the following: Google ngram [] and compare google searches for the two potential titles: "29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery" 33k results; "29th Commando Regiment Royal Artillery" gets under 2k results. Springnuts (talk) 21:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Ah, perhaps I wasn't clear. I was suggesting making an RM for moving all of them at once. If you need help, I can assist in setting that up later tonight. UtherSRG (talk) 01:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Just a comms fail - it happens! I'm not aware of problems with any other regiments' entries. Springnuts (talk) 13:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Category:Royal_Artillery_regiments. The majority of the numbered articles use the ordinal form, vice the cardinal form. Like I said, I think you are right in making the move, but this moves away from WP:CONSISTENT, so the right thing to do is more than just moving this article. UtherSRG (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

The Regts are not consistent: most do use ordinal form, but we should not impose it on the minority who don’t 😀 Springnuts (talk) 23:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Just to be sure, please check them. It will be easier to move a group all at once, than to have to go through this each time. UtherSRG (talk) 23:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not the best person to do this. Do we have Wikipedia Project Artillery or something?  I suspect someone somewhere already knows! In the meantime might we not simply correct this one?   Springnuts (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.