Talk:Colour guard

Not at all the same thing
The military-style color guard is something completely different from this apparent flag twirling activity that somehow got called the same thing. I believe these two topics should be treated completely separately with their own articles and a disambiguation page. Cacetudo 14:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The military-style color guard definately deserves its own page. There's alot more information, in-depth information, about the military color guard yet the whole topic seems to be stifled by its flag-twirling counterpart due to the fact that these two contrasting topics are on the same page. CrimsonScholar 05:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Separate them. They shouldn't be in the same place. KC9CQJ 03:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I do believe that the military form of color guard and the marching band form of color guard are two different things. The military guard is a form of pride and representation of one's country, while marching band color guard is a form of entertainment that enhances the band's halftime show. Both are awesome in their own respects, but they are not the same thing. I know a military guard would never spin the American flag, just as a marching color guard would not just stand there. I believe they should have seperate pages with a link to one another.


 * Yeah, we're all individuals! :P Actually, our band's color guard can't call themselves color guard. ROTC is color guard, so we have to be flag corp. --User:Marudita

I can't say that I agree with those who view the non-military, pageantry-related color guards as something inferior or completely unrelated. In fact, they originated from the military color guards described on this page. However, the two aspects of color guard have evolved differently enough that I agree two separate (though linked) entries are appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MattC5678 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Article separation
Based on the consensus here, I'm going to go ahead and separate these two subjects into different articles, with interlinks. Cacetudo 13:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Right, it's done. I've moved the appropriate comments from this talk page to that one. Cacetudo 16:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

FPS color guard?
Do you think that the FPS color guard(picture) would be consider as a military color guard? The American flag is placed in the middle of three flags, which is different from military color guard.--RNAi 19:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

History
There's a comment on the main page asking for a History section. This is a good idea. Quite a bit of info is available from Army FM 3-21.5 (the successor to FM 22-5 referenced in the article). -- Calion | Talk 20:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Video
Not knowing what the "counter march" mentioned in the Color_guard section looked like, I searched for a video to see it. I found this video :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vHzDyrhVvc#t=3m45s

I went on IRC to find out how to include it but nobody had any suggestions. I commented in the video asking if the creator would license it with creative commons so the pertinent section could be uploaded to wikimedia but haven't heard back. Any recommendations on how to proceed? Gene_wood 01:41, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Correct naming for this article?
I know there are extensive notes within Wikipedia's manual of style regarding whether UK or American English should be used in a particular article, but I'm a little hesitant to jump the gun too boldly on this one. I'm not looking to prefer one variant over the other in this, but it seems to me that there's a bit of a lack of consistency in this article regarding the preferred spelling of "colo(u)r" - most of the article uses the British spelling (with the obvious exception of the American section, which stands to reason), but if that's the case, why are we using the American spelling for the actual title of the article? I think the lead sentence of the article is where it's most distracting. We have "Color Guard" (American spelling) at the top of the page, but then immediately in the first sentence, "In military organizations (American spelling), the Colour Guard (British spelling) ..."

Yes, it goes on to provide "color guard" as an alternative spelling, but if "colour guard" is the first presented spelling, why is it not the preferred name of the article? And aside from that, there seems to be no standardization on which variant of English to use throughout this article. If I were making the decision on my own, even though I'm American, I'd say that the British spelling seems to make the most sense (since it seems most prevalent). I thought it might be best to seek a bit of consensus on this one before making broad changes, but I'll check back and do some cleanup if I don't hear any objections here.

Sleddog116 (talk) 07:25, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Colour guard. 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/20070614121926/http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/cadetresources/infolibrary/fm225/ch9.pdf to http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/cadetresources/infolibrary/fm225/ch9.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614121926/http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/cadetresources/infolibrary/fm225/ch9.pdf to http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/cadetresources/infolibrary/fm225/ch9.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614121926/http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/cadetresources/infolibrary/fm225/ch9.pdf to http://www.uwyo.edu/armyrotc/cadetresources/infolibrary/fm225/ch9.pdf

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) 00:23, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

American or British English? Only one spelling should be consistently used.
I think Wikipedia uses the American English standard, which is "color". I really don't care which one is used - but whichever one is used should be consistent throughout the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdysseusCipher (talk • contribs) 16:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia's Manual of Style has no standard for use of one English variant from another (MOS:ENGVAR), although you are correct in that it is expected that the individual articles use the same variant throughout (per MOS:CONSISTENCY). Typically whichever variant is most relevant for the article is the one used per MOS:TIES (so an article pertaining to Australia uses Australian English). In saying that, articles do not not have national ties to any particular nation (like this article) uses the original variant used (per MOS:RETAIN), unless another consensus is reached in the talk page. I've restored the original variant that was first used in the article (being the Commonwealth variant of colour) excluding instances where color is used as a proper nouns (so specific ranks/positions and name of the flag "National Colors"). Leventio (talk) 16:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Category
Kenixkil (talk) 02:10, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The below category should be added as the color guard is an honor guard.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Guards_of_honour