Ad-hoc unit - how to handle?
-
by LinsladeLad
Been working through the diary for 20th Hussars. A significant number of officers & men are now shown as part of a different, recently created, unit.
This is designated as 5th Cavalry Battalion, and the men from 20th Hussars make up No.3 company. There were one or two vague clues in earlier pages to suggest that other units in the brigade were also contributing men to this unit - presumably they would make up the other companies. The battalion is for men operating in a dismounted role - as indicated in the text.
This just appeared without warning in the run of diary pages. How best to handle this? Do I treat as a separate unit and ignore, or continue to tag as if it was 20th Hussars?Best regards
PeterPosted
-
by ral104 moderator, scientist
Sorry for the delayed response. Interesting one, this. I think it's probably best in this case to tag as if the dismounted unit were the 20th Hussars (this was their predominant role at this time, as far as I can make out). However, i'd be tempted to also drop an 'Other Unit' tag in there, with details of the dismounted unit and the reason for the mention as 'With'.
Not perfect, but I think it should cover all the bases.
Posted
-
by LinsladeLad
Thanks for your thoughts. Happy to do as you suggest.
If you're open to a further idea - I could hashtag this, and any similar pages, as #5thcavalrybattalion. This would allow for a search on the dismounted unit at any subsequent time. Were similar pages to occur in other units of the brigade, and be hashtagged in the same way, then a consolidated diary could be produced.
Does that have any merit?
Best regards Peter
Posted
-
by ral104 moderator, scientist
Absolutely - great suggestion!
Posted