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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
Latest comment: 5 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion
While not accepted by most dictionaries, the word "camelry" is often used for camel-mounted troops in wargaming and informal military history contexts. Mayhap it could be considered an English equivalent of méharistes? It may be noted that the word occurs in a number of Wikipedia articles already. Orcoteuthis13:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oppose.Camel cavalry covers a broad category of mounted warriors/soldiers over a period of about two thousand years. Méhariste is concerned with a specific corps of French desert troops policing the Sahara during a limited time frame (1902-1962). Cross-references are certainly warranted but not a full merger. Buistr (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Oppose. No problems with the movement of Italian and Spanish sections within the article but the argument against incorporating the North African colonial camel corps (essentially camel mounted gendarmerie keeping order amongst the desert tribes from c1900 into the 1960s) into the much broader employment of camel mounted fighters across the world from classical times on still stands. The mehariste article is more detailed and focussed than the camel cavalry one (confession - I have contributed to both) and would distort the latter. I think the solution is to retain the two separate articles with additional cross references - which I would be glad to provide. Buistr (talk) 01:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Further to the above I would note that the Camel cavalry article contains "see also" links to 11 other articles each covering a specific modern or historic camel-mounted military force. While it is presumably not proposed to merge all of these into a single sprawling article, the question remains why nominate the meharistes for merger? Buistr (talk) 10:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}