Talk:Cambridge University Officers' Training Corps

This currently reads like a recruiting brochure
See WP:NOTADVERTISING. The content appears to be largely drawn from promotional literature and websites and littered with WP:POV adjectives and adverbs. I suggest it need some severe copyediting and pruning. I've given this a try but input from others with a Neutral POV would be helpful. Blackshod (talk) 12:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Merger
As I said in March much of this appears to come from the unit's promotional material and a lot repeats that in the main UOTC page. It is probably best to merge them together, copying some of the history stuff across. Comments? Blackshod (talk)


 * Oppose: It isn't clear why we should wish to merge this/all the various OTC articles together into one awkwardly long article; there is certainly sufficient documentary evidence (both cited here, and history not yet cited, in particular Hew Strachan's history of the CUOTC) on CUOTC to merit a separate article. I'd rather see more of the OTCs getting their own articles, as there is very little detail on them in the general OTC article. Obviously the easiest source is the CUOTC's own website, and presumably editors have made use of it (and it would be good if it were balanced with more material from the printed sources), but since there is no doubt of the notability of the subject there seems no reason for a merge. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, get on with it then! However I remain dubious that the various cadet units are notable enough to merit their own entries.  Albeit that CUOTC with its battle honour may have more cause than most.  Blackshod (talk) 20:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)