Talk:Parachute Regiment (United Kingdom)/Archive 1

After the Battle of Crete, it was agreed that Britain would need paratroopers for similar operations. No 2 Commando were tasked with specialising in air borne assault.

Britain’s first airborne assault took place on February 10, 1941, ... Operation Colossus.

Which is all well and good, except that Op COLOSSUS occurred some 2 months before the battle of Crete.

Regards Bloody Sunday, I have re-inserted information re the shooting from behind of sveral of the dead and injured. I have also linked this information. It is also freely available on the Bloody Sunday article within Wikipedia. I don't understand why it was simply deleted from the page, it is a relevant element of both Bloody Sunday and therefore of the history of the Parachute Regiment. I consider any further attempt to delete it, without first engaging in considered and objective discussion, as vandalism and will report it thus. Liam Evans

Further to above, the edited amendments which I inserted re Bloody Sunday were substantially removed, including supporting external links. This substantial removal, rather than thoughtful editing, coupled with the fact that they are anonymous edits, means that I have no opportunity to discuss this issue with the other party. An amicable dispute resolution is not possible when an editor hides behind the mask of anonymity, so I am forced to progress to the next stage of Wikipedia's resolution mechanism and therefore report what I perceive to be vandalism. Liam Evans

The Bloody Sunday article contains the information, it does not need to be repeated in depth here. You may wish to add something to this article to stress the nature of the Bloody Sunday incident and its ramifications if you do not think it is obvious. GraemeLeggett 19:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the viewpoint. What you say is valid, in that the information I included in also available on the Bloody Sunday page. However, what I provided wa a synopsis of some elements of the day. As such, a summation of information elsewhere provided is a valid methid of editing this page on the Parchute Regiment. My intention is not to duplicate, merely to summarise for those readers who may not be inclined to read the full content of the Bloody Sunday page. I do not infer that my comments are exhaustive of the incident, a summary of other issues of the day can also be provided by others, youself included. Just because information may be duplicated, or summarised, elsewhere in Wikipedia is not, in my opinion, a valid reason for removal of information posted/edited by me. I understood that editing would occur for reasons of extra information, to correct invalid information, or to ehnance the legibility of a particular article. I would not remove information, espcially that which concisely summarised a facet of a particular event, on the grounds that the information is available elsewhere. Liamevans 21:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

"set Europe ablaze"

have removed this quotation as believe this refers to the setting up of the Special Operations Executive not the Paras. Cefas 17:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Edited introductory sentance

Changed the introductory sentance to - "The Parachute Regiment is the airborne infantry element of the British Army. It is considered an elite unit by virtue of its stringent selection process and rigourous training programme.". The former paragraph was bordering on rude POV to parachute troops and was written in tangled English. I have edited it for clarity and NPOV. It stated that the british parachute regiment (as with many other parachute troops from other armies) considered itself eltite - suggesting that was a view asserted only in its own eyes. >> THERE ARE FAR MORE PEOPLE BOTH MILITARY AND CIVILIAN THAT CLASS THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT AS STANDARD INFANTRY, THAN THOSE WHO CLASS THEM AS 'ELITE', I CAN ASSURE YOU OF THAT. PLUS WIKIPEDIA IS SUPPOSED TO BE 'NEUTRAL', AND CALLING THEM ELITE HARDLY MEETS THIS REQUIRMENT DOES IT?

The Para regiment is considered an elite both by itself, the army, navy, airforce, the public and the government of the UK and many other nations. As with most elite units this is because of its tough selection and training process - i have updated the introductory text to reflect this. Should anyone feel the urge to revert it please post your reasoning here. Also i made minor changes like calling it 'airborne infantry' rather than infantry element of airborne forces of the british army.

• Support Elite status. 1 Para is to further assist and work with the SAS. Also the Paras feed the SAS with the most recruits. This further cements their status as an elite force.--128.98.1.11 09:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The SFSG is made up of 1 Para, Royal Marines and RAF Regiment (and also anyone who has passed p-coy, commando course, or RAF Reg pre para), not just 1 Para. The boys within this support unit dont consider themselves 'elite' as they are working alongside soldiers that are actually elite > i.e. 21,22,23 SAS / SBS / SRR / 264 / 63 etc

They are conventional troops, end of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.27.1 (talk) 11:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I really don't think they should be called elite, as the Para's operational standards, especially in current theatres (Afghanistan and Iraq) are to that of regular line infantry regiments.

Elite troops (that are not within the UKSF group) are

Pathfinders /

148 commando battery /

BRF (3 commando brigade) /

4/73 RA

the Para's are kings of self publicity, and maybe generally fitter than line infantry regiments but do not have superior soldiering abilities —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.27.1 (talk) 11:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source for your list of elite troops ? By the way the vast majority of the pathfinder group are from the parachute regiment. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

The pathfinders are tri service now, and yes the Parachute Regiment does make up the majority if the force, but they have undergone a seperate pathfinders selection and training package; this is what makes them elite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.27.1 (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

So the answer is no then no source --Jim Sweeney (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Red Devils

'Red Devils' is the name given only to The Parachute Regiment parachute display team. I will remove this from 'nicknames' in the infobox unless anyone can prove otherwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Or apparently removing it without waiting for proof. The nickname seems to be in general use. [1] GraemeLeggett 11:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you'll find that "Red Devils" was a nickname given to British Paras during WW2 because of thier Maroon berets and exploits. I think these days it's used mainly to refer to the display team, but the nickname was not origionaly used to just refer to them.

---

The Red Devils was indeed the nickname given to them by Axis Forces in WWII. --Pandaplodder 18:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

As a former member of the Regiment, I can assure you that the last two statements are correct. British paratroopers are still occasionally refered to as "Red Devils" so this part of the article should remain. Acorn897 (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Beret Colour

Changed the false and general statement 'unlike the rest of the Infantry who wear Olive Green Berets.' Some Infantry regiments [Devonshire and Dorset Light Infantry, Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Light Infantry, Light Infantry, Royal Green Jackets, Royal Gurkha Rifles] wear Rifle Green berets, but there is no 'standard colour' as this statement would seem to suggest.

someone changed it back again... so i changed it back. what i said above is correct - some infantry regiments wear OG berets, but not all of them.

The beret article states clearly who wears what colour beret - regiments of light infantry and rifles wear a rifle green beret; regiments of foot guards (and some other line infantry) wear a khaki beret. All other English and Welsh infantry wear navy blue, unless they are a specialist (i.e. airborne (maroon), commando (green)). Scottish and Irish infantry wear traditional headgear (caubeen, glengarry etc). Hammersfan 05/06/06, 12.35 BST

regardless of what the Beret article says, i dont think the Paras article should contain information contradictory to the other.

Parachute regiment organisation

I have come to this page seeking specific information on how the Parachute regiment tactically works in combat. For example, I have not heard of the Parachute regiment using vehicles such as Warriors to train with, and yet presumably they must work with some kind of vehicle support.

It would be nice to have a typical Parachute platoon/section broken down so we can see whether they operate with vehicles, how they are organised in fireteams etc. At the moment, there is very little information on how they operate. Presumably this is common knowledge and not classified as these details are available on other elements of the British army.

Can someone please add this information to the article?

Going from personal conversations here - but the Parachute Regiment works like a normal Infantry unit, with the same section/platoon/company structure... they don't operate with vehicles in the main because they are trained and used for airborne (parachute from planes) or air assault (helicopter) missions. Horus Kol 12:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Where is 7 RHA and the TA Battalions?

I might have missed something in the recent re-organisations of the Army, but didn't 7 RHA used to be part of the Parachute regiment? And also 9 and 10 PARA (TA) seem to be missing... Horus Kol 12:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

No - 7 RHA, the answer there is in the title Royal Horse Artillery, 7 RHA were part of 5 ABN Bde and now part of 16 Air Assault Bde but being part of a Airborne Bde does not make a unit part of the Parachute Regiment.

TA units are covered and also ahve their own entry. --Pandaplodder 18:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Famous ex-paras?

Should there be a link here to ex-paras who have other exploits, or is that not appropriate? The two I know of are Chay Blyth and John Ridgway (sailor). Presumably there are some others? Kert01 16:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Korporaal1 (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC) I think lieutenant colonel Sir John Frost deserves to be in the Famous Paras section. He commanded a Para Bn for most of the war, led the Bruneval raid and commanded the only bn that actually made it to the Arnhem Bridge. We've also got a new bridge in Arnhem now that's actually named after the bloke! Idea?

unknown- What about danny rampling (Famous DJ) Member of 10 para —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.48.222 (talk) 19:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Until the nineties there were three TA battalions: 4 PARA(V), 10 PARA(V), and 15 PARA(SV). Since then they have all been reduced and amalgamated into one battalion, 4 PARA(V). Acorn897 (talk) 17:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Abtfgame.jpg

Image:Abtfgame.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 17:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Verification

To the dynamic ip beginning with 79.19., I will protect this article from being edited by anonymous or newly-created accounts if unsourced material continues to be reinserted into this article. Specifically:

That this incident occured on a Sunday, echoing the original bloody Sunday in Southern Ireland, pointed to at least some degree of deliberate intention.

Challengeable, controversial material must be attributed to reliable and reputable sources otherwise it will be removed/reverted. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for original research and theory. SoLando (Talk) 14:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Could use copy-edit

Incomplete and forced sentences are making this article difficult to read. Especially towards the ned the style becomes very distracting. Unfortunately, I am no good with copy-edit, and at least couple sentences needs more than just copy-edit, since they end up half-way through. --194.197.79.18 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 11:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Red Berets vs Maroon Berets

Have long had this nagging doubt: my grandfather was a proud Red Beret (2nd Parachute Battalion at Arnhem). Am I right in thinking that the term "maroon beret" comes from US usage? Feedback, anyone? Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 23:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, unusual question. Give me a day or so to look this up in some of my books, although my gut feeling would be that you're correct. Skinny87 (talk) 23:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Red berets these days are c*nts i.e. Royal Military Police. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.61.161 (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The term "Red Beret" is still used for paratroopers. Although the Royal Military Police have since adopted a red beret, they are never referred to in that manner (more usually referred to as the "Monkeys"). British Paratroopers often refer to themselves as part of the "Maroon Machine" and the beret as "The Cherry Beret". Acorn897 (talk) 17:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Elite Status?

I really don't think they should be called elite, as the Para's operational standards, especially in current theatres (Afghanistan and Iraq) are to that of regular line infantry regiments.

Elite troops (that are not within the UKSF group) are

Pathfinders /

148 commando battery /

BRF (3 commando brigade) /

4/73 RA

the Para's are kings of self publicity, and maybe generally fitter than line infantry regiments but do not have superior soldiering abilities —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.27.1 (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Elite as evidenced by the selective selection process Kernel Saunters (talk) 16:00, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The Parachute Regiment ARE THE ELITE you P***K!! Are training is elite and the right to wear the maroon beret makes you elite, anyone that disputes that is either a crap hat or just doesnt have the balls to stand next us in the field!! K**bh**d!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.124.236.161 (talk) 19:59, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

How sad that some people show small man syndrome when the Parachute regiment elite status is mentioned. They have a selection process that sets them apart. Only those that pass that process can be a member. Unlike normal infantry regiments who do not have one. A selection process is there to ensure only those who can pass the set tests get in. This way you have a body of men who have all proved they have the same ability with no weak links in the chain. Elite! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.178.42 (talk) 16:56, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

HA! i love reading rubbish like his! classic Para bullsh*t!! 1 Para and the rest of the SFSG can be considered elite, but 2 and 3 Para are most certainly not!! Granted the Para Depot requires more than the training that the Line Infantry undertake, but they perform to the same standards operationally.

The para's are the kings of self publicity!! P-company is an arduous course, but relativley easy compared to commando tests or RAF Reg pre-para! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.27.1 (talk) 15:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your evidence for that opinion is what exactly? Why is 1 Para considered elite in contrast to 2 and 3, what extra do they do to get in the SFSG? The evidence I provide is that Soldiers have to undergo a rigorous selection process before they can wear their Maroon beret, unlike HATs who are just given their HAT in the stores on day one. Sounds more like sour grapes to me and your only outlet to express your failings as a "HAT" Is to change a Wiki page to suit your hurt feelings and obvious jealous fixations with the only evidence being your bitter POV. No experience or evidence to back your changes. How sad for an Internet warrior to stoop so low ! So, Provide the evidance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.149.63 (talk) 16:30, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

If we forget the abuse and attacks the only difference between 1 2 or 3 Para is that you have to serve two years in 2 and 3 before you can apply for the SFSG.Jim Sweeney (talk) 19:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrong Jim, Crows are sent to SFSG from the factory "ITC (c)" phase 2, after passing P Coy. Toms and booties from SFSG attend the BPC at Brize with the rest of 16xx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.149.63 (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

That may have been true once but not any more see here the Mod 1 PARA web page.

• On completion of your first 2 years in 2 or 3 PARA you may be selected for a tour with 1 PARA who form the Special Forces Support Group (SFSG).[2] Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

The MOD web page is out of date. The MOD link I provide are the guys who oversee the students on the course. I instruct the students as a PJI at the Airborne Delivery wing, RAF Brize Norton. The MOD web page is out of date by the fact the MOD page still calls them PCAU when in fact there called PTSU Parachute Training Support Unit. http://www.army.mod.uk/training_education/training/20571.aspx

It was the case when SFSG was still in its formation stage that experienced soldiers were posted from 2 and 3 Para, however 2 and 3 started getting a bit miffed that their experience was being milked from the battalions before Herrick tours and it soon stopped and now Red DZ patches go strait from the factory to St Athens. I will also highlighted that the Royal Marines F Company did not do that well during the formation selection when they failed the live firing tests at Brecon. Even the Raf Regiment passed the tests and this caused friction in the ranks

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article45697.ece

The row began in a pub after RAF Regiment members bragged about how they beat the Royal Marines section of the unit in a tactics test.

• With the greatest respect to the anonymous writers/IP addresses above, the 'talk' page is not a blog to discuss(?) what seem to be personal observations and opinions. With respect to an encyclopedia it is often not possible to quantify what is 'elite' and what is not. It may often be a matter of opinion so I suggest the following may resolve the problem and be the most relevant for an encyclopedia entry. Replace 'The Regiment has an elite status by virtue .....' with "Airborne forces are generally perceived to have an elite status by virtue of their selection processes and training programs. The role of the Parachute Regiment is to insert ...... ' (Polite) comments please! Thanks Boatman (talk) 10:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Fascinating demonstration of the insecurity associated with having to wear a pink beret.

The main issue is that the assertion is unreferenced. Let's face it, P Company is physically demanding but that's about it. The training delivered is essentially revision of material already covered and on top of being physically drained from the intensity of the physical activity. That doesn't detract from those that have completed it, but there are much more challenging qualification courses around.

ALR (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Please name them and provide evidence as to why. .

I see more insecurity associated with not having served under an Airborne unit, just be the cheap dig at the colour of the beret. The Regiment is held in high esteem by the Public and other nations Airborne forces!

This jealousy of the Parachute Regiments public profile is the reason for this tit for tat editing, The sort of thing you only see on NAAFI bog doors. I will add it is this insecurity that has filled this page with a negative POV without evidence.

Elite status by virtue of a selection processes. Not just P Coy but a soldier has to pass the Basic Parachute Course, BPC to earn his wings. ::The very same course UKSF have to pass. If you fail, you don't get in, simple! The only way to get on a BPC is to have passed P Coy, UKSF Selection, or RM course. All have there hard parts, some parts are harder then others at various stages, end of the day all are a selection process to gain entry to a unit.

BPC isn't in itself a particularly difficult course, other than the challenge of getting out the door the first time. That's why one is expected to have completed a rigorous selection course as a pre-requisite for attendance. One might also add SFC selection to the list. And it's Commando course, which also accounts for the "All Arms" candidates.

And why might one be jealous of a pink beret when there are better ones to own?

The contributions of the IP contributor 212.124.236.161 rather sum up the usual quality of debate; immediate name calling and barely literate. But we revert back to the point, where is it evidenced that the Parachute Regiment are elite in something that's authoritative and independent of the regiment? I acknowledge that they're very much a legend in their own stand-easy, but what's required in Wikipedia is verifiability.

ALR (talk) 16:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

So no evidence for your POV!

However, I agree with Jim sweeny in this case. Its up to the reader to decide. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/366721.stm Please tell me, why so many of the Walter Mittys caught out would pretend to be Ex Para? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MufYOMH9ci0&feature=related

The BPC is a progression course, each jump harder than the other. It has been estimated that each jump equates to around seven hours work. From form up to the PLF. Its obvious you have never completed the course so your opinions fall flat and can only resort to cheap digs behind the keyboard!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisslipstream (talk • contribs) 17:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

You yourself identified the other courses that are identified as potential pre-requisites for the jump course, I merely pointed out the correct name for one of them. Given my own experience of working with Airborne elements that particular mistake is an unusual one, most paras with any time served behind them recognise the correct terminology.

You are, of course, entirely entitled to hold your own opinions of people, however what Wikipedia requires is Verifiability and that's what applies to the claim of being so leet that even the leet think their leet... Feel free to provide some corroboration of your assertion.

ALR (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Please point out the incorrect terminology you are referring to. I generalised over the various selection courses to highlight the point that all have there hard and easy parts, dependant on the individuals POV after completing and passing the course. Soldiers also have to be in receipt of a verified Para PID before they can attend the BPC!

The MOD web site have a POV as well. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/TrainingAndAdventure/ColchesterToBecomeCentreForWouldbeparas.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisslipstream (talk • contribs) 18:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Anyone who knows what they're on about would refer to Commando training as such, and not as the RM course.

As I said, authoritative and independent is what's required.

ALR (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Its an abbreviation used by many, try not to get your white flag in a twist! http://www.army.mod.uk/training_education/training/20572.aspx To attend a Basic Parachute Course (BPC), soldiers and officers must have completed and passed one of the following:

Pre Para Selection (PPS) Special Forces Selection Royal Marines Commando Course Or as we call it at ADW, RM course ;)

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisslipstream (talk • contribs) 18:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC) 

Interesting one, the web page does refer to the Commando Course, since if one were to consider RM training then we'd have a host of parachute trained bandies. I'll take your word for it that you refer to it as RM course. In my experience the vast majority of Para Regiment personnel do refer to it as Commando Course as that encompasses both recruit training and AACC.

Anyway, the point remains that if you want to claim that the Parachute Regiment are elite then provide an authoritative, independent source that states that. From a practical perspective it's a question of being clear about the task that the HQ is requiring a unit to undertake. The Parachute Regiment have a role and it's very clear what they're good at, but equally there are things that they won't be asked to do, other infantry units are more suitable.

Might I suggest that you review verifiability and neutrality policies alongside the sourcing guidance around what's acceptable evidence for your assertions.

ALR (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The elite status dispute was settled by jim Sweeny, just let the reader decide. However, you asked for links that's authoritative and independent of the regiment I provided two links already. Both in independent of the Regiment.

"but there are much more challenging qualification courses around" "BPC isn't in itself a particularly difficult course, other than the challenge of getting out the door the first time"

So what's acceptable evidence for your assertions that P Coy is not as challenging than the RM or other selection course's , other than more map reading lessons needed for F Coy boys at SFSG.

What makes the shakys Elite? Any links that's authoritative and independent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisslipstream (talk • contribs) 20:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

There are no opinions stated in either the Corps article, or the SB article about being elite (I took them out a while ago)... So no need for a reference.

It would probably pay to take a look at those policies I referred to above, to understand what requires evidence and how balance is achieved in writing the articles.

Incidentally, it would be any links that are, not that is...

HTH, HAND

ALR (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL, I take your point and a fair one. I never looked at the other pages in regards to Elite status as I was more hacked off by the obvious negative POV and vandalism of some pages being churned out on here by others. Grammar, never my strong point, just like map reading is not to Marines, but that's dyslexia for you! ;) Good work Jim btw.

I have deleted the elite status comment as it was unreferenced and just open to an edit war. Anyone reading the article will be able to decide the regiments status. Jim Sweeney (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The Para's Elite??? The only people who believe that, are 1,2 and 3 Para and 'The Sun' newspaper!

P-company is an ardouous course granted, but all arms and regiments pass P-coy! from the RLC to the AGC!

Since Afghan, the armed forces community and some of the public know that the Para Reg perform at no high standard than the Line Infantry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.27.1 (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution, but just to be clear men from the same all arms and regiments from the RLC to the AGC also pass Special Forces selection and the Commando course. Everyone will have their own opinion who or what is an elite unit. That is why the comment has been deleted from the article and there is no longer any need to comment remember this is not a forum. Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Royal Parachute Regiment?

Was there ever a move to award the Regiment with a "Royal" following World War II? Foofbun (talk) 02:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Organization

It seems to me that this article is organized rather oddly. The History section excludes the various wars and other conflicts, and Post war formations and reductions comes before the Second World War. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I have changed the layout slightly. However due to the size of this article, I am considering just having a brief overview of the operational history here. As the three main battalions and Parachute Brigades and Divisions have their own articles which are all open to improvement. Any thoughts Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Capitalization

Is it Paras or paras? Clarityfiend (talk) 07:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Good question on the British Army web site its PARAS [3] The Sun and the BBC use Paras [4] [5] Jim Sweeney (talk) 07:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)