Talk:Selous Scouts

message: The article uses, "guerillas", "insurgents" and "terrorists" interchangeably, I'm surprised "freedom fighters" didn't get a look in somewhere. Pick a neutral term and stick by it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.34.186 (talk) 23:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Be consistant

message: In all respect, the way the Selous Scouts operated was seen as committing war crimes to the rest of the world. Answering terrorism with counter-terrorism is, again, terrorism, nothing else. So, the story has a dark side of the coin, too, and maybe someone is brave enough to make this clear.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.188.77.92 (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There were massive war crimes committed by the Selous Scouts. This article lacks balance, to say the least. It's like writing an article about the Waffen SS, and only mentioning their military exploits. The problem is that these same rhodesians have not gone through a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which is why they won't mention atrocities committed by the rhodesian forces. 83.84.100.133 (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  war crimes 

message: His article was in need of a serious clean up for WP:POV and WP:WORDS. I have started. "Terrorist" is specifically on Wikipedia's list of words to avoid because it induces bias. I have opted for the word "guerrilla", which I think is more neutral. Amazingly, this article seemed to be portraying Rhodesia as  noble nation of white people surrounded by "black supremacists" and abandoned by other white countries, as opposed to a nation in which its Black majority was oppressed by a tiny White minority. I think more clean up s warranted. I will watch this article to make sure that this egregious bias does not creep back in. Ground Zero | t 02:05, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can't admit that Rhodesia was a racist state, all discussion ends there. 83.84.100.133 (talk) 17:09, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

text: A fairly obvious problem with this article is that almost all its content is referenced to the former commander of the unit. He's obviously not an objective source on the unit. Nick-D (talk) 11:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Serious POV

message: The photo in the article on the Selous Scouts, (ref. above), are not Selous Scouts at all, but, Territorials (reservists) of the Rhodesia Regiment.  If they were Selous Scouts, they would look more like a Sasquatch than men.  They lived in the bush for weeks on end, and the white operators were always in "blackface" so as not to be recognized at a distance by the enemy.  In addition, the white operators grew bushy beards to further conceal their "whiteness".
I served in the Rhodesian Security Forces as a Military Policeman for my three year enlistment.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iarminius (talk • contribs) 21:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're quite right. I'll change it. —Cliftonianthe orangey bit 21:55, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Selous Scouts on patrol" photo. 

message: This post features scans of an old document that refers to the Selous Scouts having been founded in 1963 as an armored car regiment. Could someone with actual knowledge of the subject inform us as to the relationship between the armored car Scouts and the later unit? -  Metalello talk 18:39, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no relation between the Selous Scouts and the earlier, less prominent armoured car unit apart from the name. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier date for origin of unit? 

message: 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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I'm in the process of re-working this article so that it is better balanced. This includes removing or finding other sources for the large amount of material referenced to the memoirs of the unit's commanding officer Ronald Francis Reid-Daly, and adding material acknowledging the unit's involvement in war crimes and the brutal tactics it used more broadly. Nick-D (talk) 02:59, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: We shouldn’t be using Ronald Reid-Daly as a source without attribution if at all. Right now they are our most prolific source and entirely unattributed, thats a big problem. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits being made to improve balance 

message: Insertion of Cuban and Chinese guerillas led to the formation of the Scouts and they were major adversaries. No mention is made of this, as if the war occurred in a vacuum. The omission limits the usefulness of the article. 68.205.56.144 (talk) 19:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What reliable sources support that claim? I haven't seen it in anything I've read on this topic. The article notes that the Selous Scouts were formed due to the increasing effectiveness of the guerrillas. Nick-D (talk) 23:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign Involvement