Talk:Connaught Rangers

message: I'm surprised that there's no information on the Rangers' mutiny in India in 1920. Anyone know much about it?
----
Sorry, been really busy, nearly finished the whole article which will include the Mutiny SoLando 19:04, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Rangers mutiny in India in 1920

message: A rather nice start, and a brief skim seems to indicate that it's well-written and relatively thorough. The sections on the Peninsular and Crimean War are absurdly short, however, and in my personal opinion, it looks bad. If these sections can be expanded, that would be great; if not, perhaps the statement that the Rangers served in these conflicts should be included somewhere else. Perhaps at the beginning of the following section - "After having served in the Peninsular (18xx-xxxx) and Crimean (xxx) Wars, the Rangers returned to Britain..." LordAmeth 20:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WPMILHIST Assessment

message: There's also 88th Regiment of Foot (Connaught Rangers).  I suggest that is merged here.  Alternatively, the specific 88th Foot history here could be merged there, and this left only for the  post 1880 history of the combined 88th & 94th.  (The early history of the 94th is missing from this; that page redirects here, though).  Gwinva (talk) 09:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer two seperate pages for the prior regiments Kernel Saunters (talk) 10:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've transferred the pre-1881 88th Foot info to the appropriate article.  There is nothing here on the 94th, so that page needs creating in the future.  Gwinva (talk) 01:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: More pre-1881 info may have snuck in since this. The page confusingly lightly refers to the napoleonic era units, instead of simply sending us to that earlier regiment's page. Not sure of the format for such a direction, so I'll leave it to a more experienced editor. Could the page titles include these temporal discriminations?EdJ343 (talk) 23:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: i would just like to let you know that their is an excellant association dedicated to preserving the name connaught rangers,which was formed in 2002 in boyle co.roscommon,ireland.their website is  connaughtrangersassoc.com
well done on connaughtrangers information  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.206.19 (talk) 12:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  connaught rangers association 

message: The assertion that Barror murdered 2 men is cited with ref to an unspecified passage in the "3rd Battalion, Connaught Rangers War Diary". Couple of issues with this. 
Firstly, only two Rangers were recorded in the diary as being in Dublin over Easter - Leeson and Barror. Both were on leave in Dublin when the Rising started. (The rest of 3rd Battalion - according to the self same diary - were in Cork at the outbreak). Leeson reported to an officer in the RIR, and was deployed to the Crown Alley telephone exchange. Barror reported to an officer of the 10th Bn RDF, and is recorded as being involved in actions which resulted in the deaths of 2 snipers. There is nothing in the diary about "murdering" 2 people that I can see.
Secondly, while I could (of course) be missing something in the text, unless there was some kind of court-martial (of which there would be more record), it seems very unlikely that the Bn's own diary would blithely record someone as having "murdered" two people.
This claim either needs SPECIFICS from the diary (page number, copy of text, etc) which support the claim, or it needs to be reworded to reflect the facts available. Or it should be removed. Guliolopez (talk) 21:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Hohenloh  +   23:13, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murder assertion 

message: Before you, anonymous contributor 109.154.157.211, make any further edits on any page you first need to conform to accepted Wikipedia standards of practice and proceedure and officially register with a "User:name" to enable questions arising from your edits be clarified and replied to on your talk page. You have been asked several times to name a recongnised historical source in which the mentioned "war diary" has been published, but you ignore providing this and the need for such verification. If I may make the comparison, your widespread style of editing is very reminicent of that earlier by blocked User:MFIreland. At any rate until verifiable sources are quoted, this section ought to be fought out here, but not on the article page. Osioni (talk) 18:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon contributor IP 109.154.157.211 would appear to have taken on an additional new anon IP 86.168.0.62 identity (now blocked). Osioni (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking about reporting this editor as a sockpuppet. Has this already been done? Hohenloh  +   00:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that I know of. His one day block appears to have been lifted again! Osioni (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Easter Week

message: It is said here of the regiment, "The rolls of which bore the names of every family in Connaught." (The sentence is already pinpointed as needing citation.) That looks a literary distortion (POV?) to those who are aware the regiment also recruited Irishmen from elsewhere in Ireland, besides Englishmen in the First World War - one example being England international footballer Harry Chambers, a native of Northumberland, who enlisted after being signed up by Liverpool.Cloptonson (talk) 12:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sweeping Assertion (section The Rangers After 1922)