Talk:111th Field Artillery Regiment

Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Untitled

Page set for cleanup

This should probably be deleted also as we don't do pages on individual batteries/companies unless there is some sort of historical significance attached to them. This company does not have that.--Looper5920 18:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. Since the Company has been active since 1800+ and ACW is listed as one of the war's they took place in, sections for these should be added. --dashiellx (talk) 17:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 111th Field Artillery actually does have a notable historic role, readily found on the internet. This article is seriously deficient in not mentioning it. Together with the 116th Infantry, they landed on Omaha Beach on D-Day. Lt. Col Thornton Mullins led the 111th. All but one of their 105 mm howitzers were lost before landing due to their amphibious landing craft swamping, and the last gun wound up donated to another unit. Mullins famously declared "To hell with our artillery mission, we're infantry now." If I do update this article I will have to be cautious about original research. Tomligon (talk) 18:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tomligon, recognizing I'm coming into this about 8 years later. I'm going to make some expansions to this page. We need to break out the Regiment (and its historical legacy) and its traditional subordinate BNs (1 and 2). The 1st BN is still active as a composite BN in the VANG. I would propose that I take something similar to other regimental pages and detail the reflaging, reorg traditional, and service by conflict. Squatch347 (talk) 15:22, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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!