User talk:Dormskirk

Black Watch Page

Hi Dormskirk

You are heavily involved with the page "the Black Watch", and are a senior editor. I cannot find a "email this user" on your "home page".

I have initiated this contact on behalf of the vice chairman of the BW Association. The current Black Watch page is very wrong and needs major surgery!   The key issue is the Black Watch Regiment and 42nd Regiment pages should be one, reflecting the formation of the Regiment and up to 2006. 3(Black watch) is a battalion formed in 2006 as part of the Royal Regiment of Scotland and so should be a separate but linking page.   The justification for this is best illustrated by:   1. Black Watch Museum history page: https://theblackwatch.co.uk/history/   2. Royal Regiment of Scotland MoD page: https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/corps-regiments-and-units/infantry/royal-regiment-of-scotland/   3. Royal Regiment of Scotland Museum history page: https://theroyalregimentofscotland.org/our-history/

Once the pages are properly set up (Black Watch (RHR) up to 2006, then separate 3(BW)RRS page) they would like to correct/re write the appropriate page.

Can you help? Thanks Ross McKinnell ex BW Glaekitt (talk) 17:15, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi - I completely understand your point and it is not the first time this sort of argument has been raised. The 42nd (Black Watch) Regiment amalgamated with the 73rd (Perthshire) Regiment of Foot to form the "Black Watch". Hugh Childers intended his amalgamations to be just that - amalgamations rather than take-overs. My understanding is that the amalgamation of the 42nd Regiment and the 73rd Regiment was an amalgamation of equals. As regards post 2006, we normally write wikipedia articles for individual regiments not battalions and in this case 3 (Black Watch) is of course a battalion. Incidentally you have posted this message of the "Simple English Wikipedia" instead of the main "Wikipedia". Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 17:42, 4 April 2020 (UTC)