Talk:2nd Cavalry Division (United States)

Military history: North America / United States / World War II

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:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion 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
	World War II task force

2nd or 2d

There seems to be a history of calling this formation 2d Cavalry rather than 2nd Cavalry. Probably not sufficient for a rename in terms of WP:NC but even there I'm not completely sure. But either way, it's a very interesting phenomenon that should be explained in the article IMO.

Sites that use the 2d name include:

http://www.history.army.mil/topics/afam/2CD.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/2acr.htm (but not consistently as far as I can see)

There have also been several uses of this title in en.wikipedia:

I haven't "corrected" the 1st Cavalry Division (United States) page as I think there's obviously a lot more going on than just a typo here. More information, anyone? Andrewa (talk) 17:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2d Cavalry actually refers to a regiment; when referring to a division, the word "division" should always be used. I also don't know who keeps putting up the 1st Cavalry Division insignia. Also, the division itself did not have the nickname "Buffalo Soldiers" regardless of the fact that in its second incarnation it was a Black unit. P1340 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.126.7.0 (talk) 04:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The US Army has the irritating habit (delineated in AR 25-50) of using 2d or 3d instead of 2nd or 3rd used by the rest of us. Mikeofv (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

The entire "WW2" section appears to be a literatim lift from here. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 09:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2nd Cavalry Division (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/20121226124441/http://www.history.army.mil/books/Lineage/M-F/index.htm to http://www.history.army.mil/books/Lineage/m-f/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:17, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]