Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Regular Army regiments (1962)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus.  JGHowes   talk  17:20, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

List of British Regular Army regiments (1962)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The opening LEAD says "This is a list of British Regular Army regiments after the Army restructuring caused by the 1957 Defence White Paper: many regiments were amalgamated between 1958-60. Further cuts and amalgamations took place in the 1960s and early 1970s." Yet The title is List of British Regular Army regiments (1962). How do we know these are the units in the British Army as of 1962 as a result of the 1957 White Paper which is five years after and the units changed across the 1960s and 1970s? Clearly there are no references and the article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ARTN. BlueD954 (talk) 03:45, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. BlueD954 (talk) 03:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete unsourced and no sign of notability. Mztourist (talk) 05:18, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, unsourced, no indication why 1962 would be a notable year for this information. Fram (talk) 11:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: Article meets WP:CLN WP:AOAL for keeping a list. 1962 is a major year in the Cold War (Cuba), probably the closest point in the Cold War to a hot war. Per CLN "Deleting these rudimentary lists is a waste of these building blocks".   // Timothy ::  talk  11:21, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 20:52, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The article is completely unsourced and does not even stick to its purported topic, including information such as "3rd Carabiniers (Prince of Wales's Dragoon Guards) ... amalgamated with The Royal Scots Greys (2nd Dragoons) in 1971 to form the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards (Carabiniers and Greys)". What happened in 1971 could not have affected the regiments in 1962. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete:per Metropolitan90. Aielen85 (talk) 05:23, 22 November 2020 (UTC) Confirmed sock of BlueD954. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Per norminator. Lord Grandwell (talk) 14:04, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Typo.BlueD954 (talk) 05:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: I poked around some of the wikilinks just for fun - which is what a good list will lend itself to. I found no inaccuracies on what is listed here by looking through the individual units I sampled. And while the comments on future amalgamations after 1962 may be a little confusing given the name of the list, the data on what happened to the unit after the 1962 date is excellent and useful. This to me is a good and informative list.--Concertmusic (talk) 22:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: That is not the reason. The reason is there is no references to show these units were formed or retained as as result of the 1957 White Paper. Being informative is not the reason at all. Where are your sources to show they were merged as of the 1957 paper? BlueD954 (talk) 05:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The 1962 Defence White Paper is part of Command Paper 1639. It appears that neither is readily available without some subscription access. If anyone has ProQuest access, I have found some references that these command papers may be available there, and I would love for someone to give it a look. Thank you.--Concertmusic (talk) 13:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have ProQuest access. Post requests on my talk page and I'll see if I can access the documents you are looking for. No promises though. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's give it a shot. Firstly, I base my statement about where this defence white paper may be found on this link - first sentence. Then, when I search for that numbered command paper, it gets a little muddled, because the number 1639 doesn't seem to fit into the link here about command papers. It may be a wild goose chase - but thank you for taking a quick look!--Concertmusic (talk) 21:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it exists, but could only find a summary. I did find The actual plan is found in TNA CAB 129/87/M(57)144 "The Future Organisation of the Army", 18 June 1957, which you can read here  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  23:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I look forward to some R&R - reading and research!--Concertmusic (talk) 00:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment and Keep if this is focused on the list of regiments after the 1957 White Paper, it should say that. If it is about that period, maybe 1957-59, it should be retitled and based upon a specific list, which should be available in various British Army history books or Hansard. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:CLN. In agreement with Concertmusic and Buckshot06. Sources are available, list is useful.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * "Sources are available"? There are no sources in the article, and the only one offered in this AfD, the 1962 Defence White Paper, is obviously a primary source, so not valid for an AfD discussion (it is of course fine for WP:V, but not for WP:N). Fram (talk) 08:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes there are, and I cited one above. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  09:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And I've added that source to the article. (it's not like the existence of these regiments is disputed - they weren't secrets- and they can be verfied just haven't so far in the article). GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The British Army and its structure is certainly notable – see the Encyclopedia of Modern British Army Regiments or Regiments and Corps of the British Army for example. Insofar as the structure has changed repeatedly over time, lists of the current sort are obviously needed to show this.  Relevant guidelines and policies include WP:LISTN and WP:NEXIST. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:25, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Do any of the sources here specifically address the structure of the Army in 1962 as referenced in the article title? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:29, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * To answer my own question: As far as I can tell, no. "Merged regiments and new brigading — many famous units to lose separate identity" is a 1957 newspaper article. "1st The Queen's Dragoon Guards" doesn't mention 1962. Royal Scots Dragoon Guards doesn't mention 1962. "3rd Royal Tank Regiment" says only that the regiment did home service in Catterick, England, in August 1962. "Post-War Amalgamation 1946-1966 The Queen's Royal Surrey Regiment" doesn't mention 1962. "4th Battalion, The King's Own Royal Border Regiment" doesn't mention 1962. "Birth of a regiment" is a film made in 1959. I can't view the 1969 article "Amalgamations and Disbandments in the British Army", but it isn't cited to support any particular fact in this Wikipedia article. If this article is kept after this AfD, I recommend moving it to List of British Regular Army regiments at some vague, undifferentiated time from the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s, since that seems to be all the cited sources can support. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.