Indian Army was called as so before independence also and the term British Indian Army is only used so that pre-independence army could be distinguished from the present one. But using only the formation date of the British administered Indian Army would deceive readers in thinking that present organisation is same as the old one without being a separate entity, but that's not the case.
You may see other articles infobox which have same format for the dates like United States Air Force, United States Marine Corps, United States Navy. Even article about Indian Navy and Indian Air Force use the same format, even though Indian Air Force at it's time of formation in 1932 was just called Indian Air Force and only between 1945-1950 the term Royal Indian Air Force was used. Also other organisations like German Air Force called Luftwaffe was formed during Nazi German time in 1933 but to distinguish that air force from the present German one, 1956 is given as the date of formation. Another example could be of the Russian Army which was formed in 1550 but the current form of it was formed in 1992. Job Chodh Du (talk) 09:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
- @Job Chodh Du, The German Armed Forces were dissolved in 1945 after the World War, the current is a completely different newly formed force formed in 1956. The Russian Army too was dissolved after the Civil War before 1922. The current army was formed from the division of the Soviet Army in 1991. The examples relating to US to don't hold valid as they either experienced a name change or were made into a seperate unit or put under another unit. The United States Air Force had initially been the Aeronautical Division before becoming it own service in 1947, The United States Marine Corps and United States Navy had initially been called Continental Marines and Continental Navy before being renamed. The RIN and RIAF experienced name changes too in 1950. The Indian Army has experienced no such name changes. Internal organisational structure changes are not mentioned anywhere in any Wikipedia article. Also the Indian Army before 1950 and after 1950 are the same entities, your claim that they are different is baseless and unsourced. It was not formed as the British Indian Army, which I'm immediately removing but letting the first date stay for discussion. Saying it was formed as "British Indian Army" would be WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. PadFoot2008 (talk) 09:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
- @PadFoot2008: If the Indian Army before and after 1950 are the same entities and has experienced no name changes, then why do Wikipedia have two separate articles for Indian Army and British Indian Army, it would be better to merge both of them into one and just expand the history sub section of Indian Army to include content from British Indian Army's article. Also using British Indian Army would comply with WP:COMMONNAME as more people would think of it as the army of British India than using Indian Army (official name of British Indian Army) as people may confuse it with the current Indian army. Though Indian Army is the continuation of British Indian Army but in 1950 the allegiance of the army changed from the British empire headed by the Emperor of India to the Republic headed by the President of India. With this change there was change in the names of regiments with dropping any Royal titles in the name like 4th Prince of Wales' Own (PWO) Gurkha Rifles was changed to 4th Gorkha Rifles and many more. The King or Queen Colours were also left out and new President's Colour were bestowed upon units. There were also change in the uniform insignia and rank in the Army. There are even different articles for Chief of the Army Staff (India) and Commander-in-Chief, India.
- And as for WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH, I never said Indian Army was formed as British Indian Army and just it would be more realistic to use the term here, even though it was not the official name. It makes no sense to use two dates when both the names are same, so instead British Indian Army should be used for the older organisation. Job Chodh Du (talk) 13:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
- The article exists detailing the "period" before the republic such as the history, battles, wars formation etc. And again this is not standard Wikipedia convention to list two dates unless there is a name change. Two dates are not required. It is only required in case of a name change. Please understand that RIN, RIAF, and all those US military units had name changes. Royal Indian Navy to Indian Navy, Royal Indian Air Force to Indian Air Force, Continental Navy to United States Navy, Continental Marine Corps to United States Marine Corps and Aeronautical Division in US Signal Corps to United States Air Force. The Indian Army didn't have a name change. PadFoot2008 (talk) 13:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
- There is no point in arguing and would do no good, when our opinions are conflicting. So it would be better if we invite other established users for discussion. I suggest you tag 3-4 users who will be productive for the discussion and I will do the same. Job Chodh Du (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
- I propose a status quo for now. Leave everything as it is now and maybe do an RFC a week later. I hope you shall understand that as I'm a bit preoccupied with other Wikipedia work right now. Thank you. Do see the discussion in Royal Indian Navy I opened. PadFoot2008 (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
- Fine by me. Job Chodh Du (talk) 07:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
_without_national_boundaries.svg)
Done – although I couldn't find a linked-to reliable source for this appointment. Dhtwiki (talk) 22:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)