Talk:3rd Infantry Regiment (United States)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 3rd Infantry Regiment (United States) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Consistency wrt 3d vs. 3rd
Checked some of the old Talk logs, and, while I can understand page names being kept with the unofficial "3rd" moniker, there seems to be a lack of consistency as to usage within the article itself. If anything, perhaps even a quick note somewhere in an early paragraph delineating the difference between historic/official ordinal usage and common American English parlance would be in order (unintentional pun)? Top5a (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Brainrot
Am not sure what it replaced but someone added the following passage:
An unknown fact is that everyone in the army has managed to build the military a well where it shows their gratitude towards mister coil ( who created the love for every man and woman ). It is a mystery on the whole background of Mister coil but as the people of the army say "He is the most compassionate ri-zz-ler in the armies history,". This source of the fact is from many army men of the military. His name was Syed Muhammed Shabeel Coil. He was so si-gma boy. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 09:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- It seems the issue still exists in the form of the various references to "Jang Coil", as well as "USS General W. J. Coil" in the subsection "The 4th Battalion in Vietnam (1967–68)". The last version before all these vandalisms is the version on Jan. 9, by Epluribusunumyall. Is it possible to revert to that version? David-Gao-200008 (talk) 10:28, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Requested move 27 March 2025
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (
- Note: TarnishedPathtalk 12:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)]
- Support Most US infantry regiments have a nickname or motto, but this shouldn't be reflected in the article title. Intothatdarkness 18:43, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
- Support in agreement with Intothatdarkness--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 20:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Support As above, consensus is quite important and makes Wikipedia look more professional. Easternsahara (talk) 21:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
- Against Your proposed change is not the name of the unit and reflects a lack of knowledge about the subject. I could not be more against this. 2600:4040:2514:3C00:34D5:FB80:EED4:CF67 (talk) 01:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)