Talk:Dragoon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

D Battery, 1st Battalion, 5th Field Artillery is the true, oldest continuously active combat unit in the U.S. Army. See http://www.riley.army.mil/Units/1BCT1ID/1-5FA.asp and click on the "Unit History" link for the details.

Contents 1 Merge in mounted infantry 2 Dragoon page should not be listed under pigeon breeds Dragoon 3 False Link 4 In case you didnt know... 5 Information re; American Dragoons worth it's own entry

[edit] Merge in mounted infantry

I think the article mounted infantry should be merged into this article. --Philip Baird Shearer 14:41, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. That was indeed originally what dragoons were, but the term "mounted infantry" began to be commonly used long after dragoons had become standard cavalry. -- Necrothesp 18:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree -- too many similarities between the two - Brian Stout.

Keep them separate. Dragoons and mounted infantry may have had similar functions in their respective beginnings but they did not share a common time frame and evolved into quite different types of horse soldiesrs.

I agree with those who disagree - keep them separate - they are not the same. Dragoons morphed into something different over time. There should also be mention of the Australian Light Horse units of WWI in the Mounted Infantry article. As well, add a link to the Cavalry article at the bottom of the Dragoons page. -- Tom Rycroft, 6 Apr 06

I agree with Tom just use the link at the bottom of the page.

The categories should not be merged. The Society of the Military Horse has started a thread on its website on the merger of these topics, and this topic in general. Pat H. http://www.militaryhorse.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6393

[edit] Dragoon page should not be listed under pigeon breeds Dragoon

I am not sure if this should be folded into it or not, but it should not be listed under pigeon breeds, Dragoon. While there is a pigeon breed called Dragoon, this article has nothing to do with that breed.

John Verburg The Pigeon Cote www.pigeoncote.com

[edit] False Link

I removed the link to Dragon, because, well, it's not the right link. The Disambiguation page doesn't list a carbine called a dragon, so unless someone can provide the right article, I don't think this should have a hyperlink at all.

[edit] In case you didnt know...

In the game The Legend of dragoon, a Dragoon is a warrior said to come in time of need to fight such things as winglies. When in fact a dragoon is a soldier that rides on horseback. Also in the game a dragoon can gain five d lv ( dragoon levels). Maybe this is a thing that also reverts to history. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.122.64.178 (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Information re; American Dragoons worth it's own entry

I think the very detailed section regarding the US Dragoon regiments confuses the entry, which until this point appears to be a general overview of the cavalry unit type. It would be better to replace this section with a brief detail of the US Dragoons, and resection the additional information and historical detail in a new entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.109.150 (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

• I agree. The extensive material assembled on historical American dragoons is excellent and would serve as a solid basis for a separate "U.S. Dragoons" article. It is however a bit out of place amongst a listing of surviving dragoon regiments in modern armies. Brief details recording the present day U.S. units with a dragoon heritage should be sufficient for this part of the general "Dragoon" article. Buistr (talk) 00:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• I also agree. Espcially as the subheadline is "Modern Dragoons", I is not appropiate to have a small essay about historial U.S. dragoons in the Early American Wars. Beringar —Preceding comment was added at 21:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)