Talk:Royal Irish Regiment (1992)

Royal Irish Rangers
The Adelaide University Regiment was allied to the Royal Irish Rangers. Has this affiliation transferred to the Royal Irish Regiment? AUR still wear a green patch behind their cap badge. Members of the AUR Pipes and Drums wear a saffron diamond behind their cap badges. Ozdaren 13:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Regiment of the "line"
Does the British Army still distinguish between regiments of the "line" and other regiments? The Wikipedia article on the Irish Guards refers to there being two Irish regiments in the British Army. It would seem logical for this article to concur with this or, perhaps, to include a definition of, or a link to an article about, "line" regiments.

It is still important but may not be relevant- see Line infantry. I chose to join a line infantry regiment with 300 years of tradition not a guards regiment with 70 years of history. Guards regiments do still have different roulement or rotations to line infantry as they need to squeeze in public duties. Now, of course, line infantry regiments (as well as corps and commonwealth units)also do public duties. Tradition aside, there is no real difference between line and light infantry. --MJB 09:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Title
I seriously suggest you guys move this page to something that makes sense. Its like 4653 regiments that you guys are trying to put in the main title. I would SEROIUSLY suggest you change this articals name or break it up ForeverDEAD 21:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You are clearly ignorant of the British Army - that is the Regiment's title. It is not appropriate to shorten it save to the approved military abbreviation of R IRISH which would be confusing. --MJB 10:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It may be the regiments title but its a bitch to read. To a fellow country men it seems nice but to somonefrom another country it makes absoutle no sense why every little regiment must be named. It could eiasly be named the royal irsh regiment'S and then in the held liner state each or the regiments. ForeverDEAD 20:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Your interest is appreciated but your point is unconvincing. Frankly. who cares what someonr from another country thinks. The regiment has a proud history of nearly 320 years and the title will reflect some of that. --MJB 21:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Royal Irish regiment(s) get about 1,530,000 hits in google. while the current title gets only about 1050. Its common practice here to use the common names. Also my presence from another country does not count out my opionion of advice. ForeverDEAD 21:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Battalions
I believe that the 7th Battalion was actually the 7/10 (City of Belfast) Battalion as it was already an amalgamation of the 7th and 10th battalions of the UDR or is my memory worse than I thought. - Mike (E Coy)GreayArea (talk) 00:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixing links
Today my link fixes were reverted with a careless edit summary "created confusion". Here's what my edits did:

-- This edit just bypassed the redirect by linking to the actual title name, while piping so that the original writer's text is still displayed. I trust that my edits will not be carelessly and incorrectly reverted again. Ground Zero | t 22:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) replaced Conspicuous Gallantry Cross(CGC) by Conspicuous Gallantry Cross(CGC) -- This link had incorrect spacing, and needlessly included the acronym in the link, which just makes the link longer without making anything clearer for the reader. I have changed it to the standard Wikipedia format.
 * 2) replaced PWRR by Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment (PWRR) -- Per WP:MOS, acronyms are to be spelled out on first use (at least). Not every reader can be expected to know what "PWRR" means. Only those already familiar with British military history would know this.
 * 3) replaced Queen Elizabeth II by Queen Elizabeth II


 * If someone disagrees with you, it is a little arrogant to assume that they are incorrect or careless. If you introduce the abb PWRR, why use the full title later on? --MJB (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I wrote "careless" because your reversion undid changes that were consistent with the Wikipedia Manual of Style, and because your edit summary provided no clarification on why you were reverting.
 * It is acceptable in the Manual of Style and in standard writing style to repeat the full name instead of using the acronym where the second reference is far enough along in the article that the reader cannot be expected to remember what the acronym stood for. If you think it is close enough, you can replace the full name with the acronym and remove the link, and I will not object. I do object to expecting that the reader will know what the acronym means when it is a very obscure one. Ground Zero | t 21:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Casualties
Max you say it gives sense to what the regiment does in your edit summary, dont want to be flippant but what does that mean, they get killed? It is clearly a memorial to soldiers killed while serving the RIR. BigDunc Talk 08:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The Belgians have infantry who superficially do the same job. The casualty list illustrates that this infantry regt is different as it is very frequently in harm's way. It is one thing to say "they are in Helmand province [they are]" and entirely another to illustrate the human-cost with real names from real places. By the way, your comment is certainly flippant and, perhaps, borderline insulting. --MJB (talk) 12:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Apologies for not showing the correct amount of levity. But they are an infantry unit serving in war zones and as such will have casualties, especially with the well documented lack of proper equipment. IMO this fails WP:MEMORIAL Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be notable besides being fondly remembered. as I cant see the rational behind the inclusion of the members here. BigDunc  Talk 13:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I will redraft it to give numbers and not names. This week I am only going to get upset by the opinions of people in my top billion grown-ups. Sorry, you just failed to make it. I am sure the R IRISH familes and I can cope with your levity. --MJB (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Only "IRA" (and not "PIRA") an abbreviation for the Provisional IRA ?
This is an article about a military unit that had a proud history in fighting PIRA terrorism and most commonly used exactly that abbreviation for some of their enemies.

For example, the last sentence of the page at http://www.army.mod.uk/infantry/regiments/29517.aspx currently states:

Another example from a report published by HM Stationery Office:

Even our own article on the Provisional IRA states quite clearly in the first sentence that "PIRA" is one of  2  usual abbreviations.

So, is this reversion reasonable? BushelCandle (talk) 04:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


 * You can have as many abbreviations as you like on the main article, but there's no need for more than one here. You could mention PIRA was the RIR's favoured acronym. Gob Lofa (talk) 17:33, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ in this revision BushelCandle (talk) 21:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Inaccuracies on Page
I am Regimental Secretary of The Royal Irish Regiment and, as such, am charged with custodianship of the Regimental brand and preservation of Regimental history and traditions.

The Wikipedia page on The Royal Irish Regiment is inaccurate in a number of critical areas, namely:

1.

I am Regimental Secretary of The Royal Irish Regiment and, as such, am charged with custodianship of the Regimental brand and preservation of Regimental history and traditions.

The Wikipedia page on The Royal Irish Regiment is inaccurate in a number of critical areas, namely:

1. --82.109.66.145 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 20 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Templates can be difficult animals to use.
 * Since I am watching this page, please just write the corrections/amendments/additions/ deletions that you think are needed, as plainly as possible below in simple English, and I will make them if they are reasonable (and especially if you can provide good sources for them)... BushelCandle (talk) 21:31, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Royal Irish Regiment (1992). 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/HistoryAndHonour/QueenAwardsConspicuousGallantryCrossToTheRoyalIrishRegiment.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/ophons05/ophonslst05.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/HistoryAndHonour/OperationalHonoursAndAwardsList6March2009.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:07, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Moved here from article page
Since this text was not appropriate for the main page, I have deleted it there and moved it here:
 * "Reference Royal Irish Regiment link to Royal 1rish Rangers website please can you amend link to RIR.htm a new website has been built by me, and sorry but most of the page names have been changed to make it easier https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Royal_Irish_Regiment_(1992)&action=edit&section=13 to distinguish them."

--BushelCandle (talk) 02:35, 21 May 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. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Royal Irish Regiment TRF.jpg