Talk:86th Infantry Brigade Combat Team

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 86th Infantry Brigade Combat Team. 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:

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) 11:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CSIB and Unit Patch Inaccuracy

Say, didn't the 86th IBCT (MTN) just repatch back to it's former, buck's head patch? Most Soldiers of this BCT don't wear the former, 10th Mountain Division patch anymore. Perhaps a talented, Wiki editor can research and update this page to reflect the change? Barbwire45 (talk) 21:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying but cannot find any official articles or documentation to support the move back to the cooler looking SSI, just anecdotal evidence. --McChizzle (talk) 21:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@McChizzle: Based on these recent news articles, I think you're right. This one (photo 3) and this one. Look at the shoulder sleeve insignia and it's pretty clear that they're wearing the stag's head not the crossed swords. I'll try to find something official so the change to the article can be made.
Billmckern (talk) 00:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@McChizzle: Here's another article I think supports your contention.
Billmckern (talk) 00:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --McChizzle (talk) 14:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

History Section Wrong, Needs Editing

hello everyone, long time Wikipedia reader, new account holder, and therefore dont know the first thing about Wikipedia editing.

While diving into the history of National Guard Infantry divisions, brigades, and regiments, I noticed that this article's history section claims that the 86th brigade and 172nd Infantry regiment draw their numbering from the 86th ID and 172nd Brigade. The issue with this is that the 86th brigade is a National guard unit and the 86th ID and 172nd brigade were army reserve units, and unit heraldry and honors almost never cross component boundries like that. After applying the numbering scheme implemented by the army for infantry units at the start of wwi and that was carried into the interwar period (specifically for this instance, IDs 26 to 74/75 alloted to the national guard, with the brigades and regiments numbered sequentially starting at 51 and 101 respectively), it becomes clear that the association presented in the article is speculation based on coincidence. Where the 86 and 172 numbers fit in, is that in the aformentioned numbering scheme, the 172nd infantry would align with 86th Infantry brigade in the 43rd Infantry division. Looking at the article for the 43rd infantry division, it shows that when the 43rd was first organized in (iirc) 1920 in the national guard in the new england area, amongst its constitutants was the 172nd infantry regiment under the 86th infantry brigade; unfortunately, did not notice any hyperlinks to a source in that article to back it up. Speaking of sources, the three hyper linked sources for the statement i draw contention with do not support the statements claim; instead, they simply show that during wwi, the 86th IDs composition included the 172nd infantry brigade.

Sorry for the long explination, just needed to make sure it was fully explained Housley11 (talk) 04:27, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Housley11: Working on it. Take a look at today's updates and let me know what you think. I'll keep working when I'm able, and also try to compile a list of commanders when I have time. Billmckern (talk) 14:01, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good overall. It appears you found some sources i wasn't aware of. Thank you. Housley11 (talk) 05:37, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:86th_Infantry_Brigade_Combat_Team