This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients is part of the Lists of Victoria Cross recipients by campaign series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured list |
![]() | This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Edmonton Bulletin during the war quoted letter from staff officer of 30th infantry Brigade, 10th Division, Mediterranean Expeditionary Force, saying that Capt. C.Y. Baldwin of the same unit won a VC some time before being wounded at Gallipoli. (Ed. Bulletin, Jan. 18, 1916) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.208.33 ( talk) 06:43, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
"Estimates of how many Irish men fought in the First World War vary, but it is now generally accepted that around 200,000 soldiers from the island of Ireland served over the course of the war." http://www.iwm.org.uk/history/irelands-role-in-the-first-world-war
"37 Irish VCs in World War I" /info/en/?search=List_of_Irish_Victoria_Cross_recipients — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.171.80.247 ( talk) 15:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus DrStrauss talk 19:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
– As these are all featured articles, I have decided not to be
wp:bold in moving these articles myself. Per the
consensus at Talk:Military history of the United Kingdom during World War II, it was decided that
Military history of the United Kingdom during World War II should not be moved to
Military history of the United Kingdom during the Second World War, the consensus reading (to quote
Mahveotm) for page not to be moved for consistency and as per
WP:COMMONNAME
.
Amakuru remarked at said discussion that he thought there was a case for deprecating usage of "Second World War" across the whole Wiki
for consistency's sake, and I am inclined to agree. --
Nevé
–
selbert 00:34, 21 September 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.
DrStrauss
talk 11:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.
DrStrauss
talk
13:38, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Comment: for the record, and because
DrStrauss is currently ill and cant respond. I am against this move request being reopened. As a matter of procedure I would suggest waiting at least 6 weeks before opening a new move request on the same principle. British Great War Veterans would literally turn in their graves over this abysmal idea. If you want consistency then go and rename the Second World War articles. Per guidelines the title should reflect the English variant used by the recipients during their lives - 20th century British English. To even consider renaming this for 'consistency' is an affront to their honor, I seriously reject trying to reduce the mass killing of millions of people to a roman numeral, it should, and is, written out in full for a good reason. Obviously this reasoning does not apply to
British anti-invasion preparations of the Second World War, which could perhaps be considered on its own, however as a matter of procedure it would be advisable to wait before opening a new move request.
Dysklyver
21:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)