Talk:7th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment

Grey 2008

You may wish to take Grey 2008 to Military_history_of_Australia_during_the_Vietnam_War where they have drawn a different conclusion from sources of a similar time era, and characterise the dispute there as being firmly resolved on the side of the debate as Ming begging the US to let him be silly mid off on the Vietnamese wicket. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Fifeloo, I've made an attempt to reconcile the differences in the sourcing in the Military history of Australia during the Vietnam War article as you suggest. If you could take a look, I'd be obliged. Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 12:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks good, brings the exciting element of the historiographical debate about who, when, forward! Fifelfoo (talk) 12:53, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Re-role as Light

No mention of loosing Mech? The RAR page already states 5 and 7 have begun to re-roleAJAussie (talk) 12:40, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Update to Unit History

Needs an update. Very little information on deployments after returning to order of battle. Compared to 5 RAR page it this one is poor. I'll update and bring it more in line with the other layout.AJAussie (talk) 12:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes - Feb 2015

Gday - I recently reverted a number of changes added by a new editor - User:7RAR, pls see here [1]. Whilst I completely agree that this page is in need of being updated, and a lot of the information recently inserted could be used in this process; however, rather than just deleting what is already there and copying the whole new draft across I think we need to make to merge the two together more carefully. Specifically, there were a few issues I saw with the new draft, including:

1. Deletion of existing referenced information;
2. WP:UNDUE weight being placed on recent operations (i.e. Afghanistan);
3. Addition of non-free images that will likely be deleted as they don't comply with the WP:NFCC rules;
4. A large amount of unreferenced text being added (per WP:VERIFY this really needs to be cited);
5. Lists of soldiers killed in action which is probably not appropriate per WP:NOTMEMORIAL;
6. There were also a range of formatting issues but I accept that wiki format is something we all have to learn when we start out; and
7. Quite a lot of "trivia" has been included (i.e. various dining in nights, football matches etc.) these really should not be included per WP:TRIVIA.

@7RAR: - Thank you for taking the time to help with updating this page, we certainly need more editors that are prepared to work on these pages. Unfortunately Wikipedia has a lot of rules which can sometimes take a new editor a while to learn so I'd be quite happy to assist you with updating this page and with explaining any questions you have regarding wiki policy and formatting as you do so. That said I ask that you take a care in doing so and acquaint yourself with the relevant guidelines as well. In the meantime, although I have reverted your additions I will probably re-add some of the material you have provided where appropriate if I can find citations to support it. Regards. Anotherclown (talk) 01:50, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Attempted Updating Failed

Anotherclown/Babitaarora reverted my edits to '7th Battalion, the Roy Australian Regiment' citing that I had not even read revisions made by another editor. I shall address that: 1. Deletion of referenced information: there was very little/no deletion of existing information. There was some change of order which you would prevent you from seeing this if you clicked 'difference between revisions'. Some information was replaced because it was out of date/no longer relevant.

2. Undue weight being placed on recent operations. You will notice that: -Vietnam first tour contained 581 words. -Vietnam second tour contained 494 words. -RTF-1 contained contained 424 words. -MRTF-1 contained contained 629 words. -ATF-1 contained contained 171 words. -ATF-2 and Kabul contained 215 words. This demonstrates that the spread of operational commentary is fairly even, and leans towards less information relating to the most recent operations. It should be noted that the information pertaining to ATF 1&2 is very limited in the civilian sphere; not even held by the Australian War Memorial.

3. Addition of non-free images that will likely be deleted as they don't comply. Most of the images involved in the article were released by the Australian Department of Defence for Media use; the rest were previously available on Wikipedia or taken by members of the 7th Bn who release the images for public use.

4. A large amount of unreferenced text being added. I'll approach this in two parts: 4a. I can only see the following paragraphs without citations MRTF-1 Operations (this information was gained from the same reference as MRTF-1 Para, don't see a need to quote it twice) ATF-2 (There is very little written about this deployment, none on the internet or at the War Memorial. The information gained was through interview of 7RAR pers who were present. ADF Social Media policy indicates that Defence members cannot identify themselves on Social Media, nor would I want to identify them.) SIB/current composition (No civilian interest was apparent when 7 RAR transitioned to SIB. The information was gained first hand be people who were there last year) Hierarchy (This list is maintained current absolutely nowhere in print and cannot be referenced. Instead; I challenge anybody to disprove it.) Graham Cornes Football match (an initiative taken last year by LTCOL Wells, it has received nil media attention. There is nothing anywhere to reference to it either in print or digitally, except the picture of it occurring.) KIA (This list was transcribed from the honour roll displayed at 7RAR's barracks in Horseshoe Lines, Adelaide. I have subsequently revised this and included a reference.)

5. Lists of soldiers killed in action which is probably not appropriate per WP:NOTMEMORIAL There is no attempt to memorialize the list of 7 RAR members who died on operations; simply a list. It does not say 'in respect of' or 'lest we forget' or anything except that they were killed in action. The intent in future is to investigate each of these members and provide information regarding their background, service and manner of death. The leadership of 7RAR was canvassed IRT listing the Bn's KIA and overwhelmingly agreed that it was appropriate and in good taste, as I'm sure the families of the deceased would agree.

6. Quite a lot of "trivia" has been included (i.e. various dining in nights, football matches etc.) these really should not be included per WP:TRIVIA. This 'trivia' is included under the heading 'Regimental Artifacts and Traditions'. Yes; it is a list. It is an important list that defines factors of a the Bn's culture and identity; it is not trivia and should not be presented in another way.

Approximately 6,300 words of new information was presented in this revision, updating the article from about 2006 to 2015. It is the work of the Officers of the 7th Battalion. I may be new to Wiki Formatting etc (FYI this interface is extremely prohibitive and counter to Wikimedia's objectives). I do not believe that this knowledge, derived from subject matter experts, holds no value to Wikipedia and the world. I believe that the information should be left as posted. If people wish to add more information, or references become available in future, they can add them. I'm sure there are a lot of 'amateurish' Wikipedia edits out there that present new information. It should be up to the community to improve the presentation of the information; not to suppress it.

I'm going to re-edit the page with a few minor mods as per your suggestions. I noted that you could not have read the article in the time it took between posting and revert. I implore you to look at more than the comparison tool as it is misleading due to the change in order (which is why I wanted to restart the article initially). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7RAR (talk • contribs) 12:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, 7 RAR, unreferenced/uncited information should not be added to the page per the site's verifiability policy. Personal interviews with serving members do not count as suitable references per the site's policy on reliable sources and unfortunately if something has received no coverage in third party sources, it should not be added. Wikipedia's function is to report what information is covered in reliable third party sources, not to report unpublished information.) Additionally, as a number of editors have reverted your additions now, site policies such as WP:CONSENSUS and WP:BRD stipulate that you should attempt to gain consensus before continuing to add your information in. As such, I ask that you wait to see if others agree with your changes based on your justifications before adding them back in, otherwise essentially what you are engaging in is an WP:EDITWAR against three or four people who have disagreed with your revision. I personally agree with a lot of the points that Anotherclown has made about your draft. In addition, I am concerned that this article also duplicates information that is elsewhere, or should be elsewhere, e.g. the information on the 7th and 2/7th Battalions. Finally, given that you appear to belong to 7 RAR, please read the site's policy relating to conflicts of interest. While editing articles on organisations that you belong to is not strictly prohibited, significant caution is advisable. AustralianRupert (talk) 19:26, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

@7RAR: - Apologies for the delay in returning to the conversation but I have been busy with work this week. Whilst I agree more information about the Bn's operations in Afghanistan is needed, unfortunately the definitive account of AS operations in Afghanistan is still to be written so until then many articles like this will not be able to be fully updated. The point re UNDUE is that at approx. 1,500 words in total (compared to just 1,000 approx. for Vietnam, you covered this aspect of the Bn's history in far too much detail when one compares the scale of operations in Vietnam to those in Afghanistan, whilst it was also almost entirely unreferenced - pls note interviews with participants, anonymous or otherwise, are not valid sources for our purposes - pls see WP:RS for the policy IRT reliable sources). You mention that your draft is written by the officers of the Bn but it really isn't relevant. If you are interested in using interviews etc to write an account of the recent history of 7 RAR I would suggest that a peer reviewed journal such as the Australian Army Journal might be more appropriate for this. I also agree with User:AustralianRupert that the information about the 7th Bn (AIF) and the 2/7th Bn (2nd AIF) should not be included in this article as it belongs in the Wikipedia article on those bn's instead (as long as its referenced), while 7 RAR does not claim a formal linage to either bn at any rate. I do not want to discourage a new user from contributing to our articles, but can see why you might view the issues being raised here as frustrating. From my point of view its obvious to me that you are clearly trying to improve the article by adding up to date information, it is just that this needs to be done in a manner that complies with the policies both myself and AR have pointed out to you. Although it is in no way a requirement—and many of the more productive WP:MILHIST project members have no military background at all—for what its worth both User:AustralianRupert and myself have served in the Australian Army (AR was a combat engineer and I served with an RAR bn in Afghanistan) so I think you will find we are both quite sympathetic to your desire to improve this article. As such pls refrain from pointed comments regarding the families of the deceased, as you never really know just who you might be corresponding with in these forums. Anotherclown (talk) 06:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

@AustralianRupert:@Anotherclown: Thanks to User:AustralianRupert and Anotherclown for their efforts in providing some extremely useful and constructive guidance to a new user. I'm glad that we can agree on the content in the following headings: intro, formation, Vietnam (first and second tours), linking with 5 RAR, mechanisation, re raising, hierarchy, battle honours and alliances. I find your advice regarding past Seventh Battalions particularly useful and will attempt to contribute to these articles also. In other news:

- I am willing to compromise on the word count for recent operations in Afghanistan/Iraq. I shall omit the list and description of operations on MRTF-1 and combine ATF2 with Kabul.

- I have reviewed the content for Move to Adelaide, ATF 1, Transition to SIB and Pipes and Drums. IAW your guidance regarding WP:verifiability; I have sought out more reliable references for these pieces and I believe that they are now approaching your standards. It is my intent to upload these articles individually and from the online drafts. Could you please assess these when you next have the chance?

- I am currently seeking differentiable sources for information on RTF-1 and MRTF-1. I have made contact with the 7 RAR association and will be engaging with other Battalions as this is proving difficult.

- I have made contact with Kev from the 7 RAR Association who is assisting me in finding and/or publishing references for the following headings: Gabby Hayes DIN, The CO's Table, C Coy Road Runners, Sou Cha Pha DIN, Graham Cornes Footbal Match. I shall endeavour to find a way to present this information in non-list form; perhaps as a single heading. Expect me to begin adding these soon. Once again, your guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

7RAR (talk) 08:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello again 7RAR. Thanks for your response, its good to hear you are still prepared to have a go at this. Once you have the references you are digging up and have drafted your proposed additions, I would suggest posting them here on the talk page (perhaps by individual section for ease) so that we can discuss them first. Re Hayes DIN, The CO's Table, C Coy Road Runners, Sou Cha Pha DIN, Graham Cornes Footbal Match etc, yes I think this info can be included in the manner suggested (i.e. single heading). One suggestion might be under a section called "Traditions" as this structure has been used in some other battalion histories I've seen. Anotherclown (talk) 08:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

@7RAR: If you're affiliated with the unit you might want to look at the 7 RAR army.gov.au page. Much easier to cite a source if it's up to date. AJAussie (talk) 05:33, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

References

ATF 1

I've been looking for public information on ATF 1 and have so far found the following.

1. 7 RAR mortars return to the fight.
2. New Australian Task Group takes over in Afghanistan.
3. Farewell Parade for 12 Aus-TF (7 RAR).
   

There are a couple news article on ANZAC Day 2013 as well. AJAussie (talk) 05:59, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

References