Talk:199th Infantry Brigade (United States)

3rd U.S. Infantry

I know it looks redundant to have the U.S. in the middle of the name of the regiment, however, the U.S. is not just a country designator like it is for the rest of the units on Wikipedia that was tacked on for clarity's sake. The U.S. in the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment is actually part of its official name and needs to be included in order for it to be considered correct and accurate. This is the case with very few units in the U.S. Army, but exceptions do exist and this is one of them. This has come at the end of a very heated discussion over this very topic at the Military History WikiProject, afterwhich it was decided that accuracy should never be sacrificed for the sake of consistency with other U.S. units, particularly since this unit and its name are different than the units they're being compared with. --ScreaminEagle 14:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It appears the US Army Center of Military History does not agree. Below are official lineage and honors statements for the 3d and there is no inclusion of "U.S." In fact, these statements show that "U.S." has never been a part of the 3d's official designation at any time in its history. Adding "U.S." seems to have been the product of someone's active imagination at some time in the past.

http://www.history.army.mil/html/forcestruc/lineages/branches/inf/0003in.htm

http://www.history.army.mil/html/forcestruc/lineages/branches/inf/0003in001bn.htm Excerpt: "Redesignated 1 October 2005 as the 1st Battalion, 3d Infantry Regiment"

http://www.history.army.mil/html/forcestruc/lineages/branches/inf/0003in002bn.htm

http://www.history.army.mil/html/forcestruc/lineages/branches/inf/0003in004bn.htm

Elsewhere in the Army, Airborne units insist on calling themselves "***th Parachute Infantry Regiment" or "***th Airborne Infantry Regiment," but such designations went away in the late 1950s and today a unit is simply called "***th Infantry Regiment." While adding something unusual to the designation (such as "Parachute" or "U.S.") makes a unit seem more noteworthy, it's at variance with reality.VilePig (talk) 19:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• https://www.benning.army.mil/199th/index.asp
  • In 199th Infantry Brigade on 2011-05-25 06:46:42, 404 Not Found
  • In 199th Infantry Brigade on 2011-06-25 12:58:16, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 199th Infantry Brigade (United States). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070527221539/http://www-cgsc.army.mil:80/carl/resources/csi/content.asp to http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/content.asp#brigade

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:31, 17 September 2016 (UTC)