Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Second Boer War Victoria Cross recipients
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 23:14, 20 January 2009 [1].
[edit] List of Second Boer War Victoria Cross recipients
It has been a while since I was here, but another Victoria Cross recipient list for your perusal. I think this meets all the criteria and follows in the wake of other lists in the campaign topic. The Second Boer War is actually covered quite well in Wikipedia, but South African villages isn't. I have created a large number of stubs for them, but there are still a few redlinks. I don't think that is an issue though, nor is it covered by any FLC criteria. Thanks for your time. Woody (talk) 18:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Comment - it was my understanding that the award to Frederick Hugh Sherston Roberts was also posthumous, yet this is not reflected in the list. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment, depends exactly how you define posthumous I suppose, he didn't die during the action that won him the VC, surviving for a couple of days after the battle. It appears from the despatches published in London Gazette: no. 27157, pp. 506–507, 26 January 1900. that he was recommended for the VC by the CinC, Redvers Buller, before his death. The Royal Warrant and procedures then in force meant that an action directly observed by a CinC and duly recommended for a VC was almost certain to be confirmed, though interestingly, Buller declined to recommend Harry Norton Schofield for the VC for this action, but he was later awarded it. The actual citation, in London Gazette: no. 27160, p. 689, 26 January 1900. records him as "since deceased". David Underdown (talk) 09:15, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I couldn't have put it better myself David. These lists have generally defined posthumous as being killed whilst carrying out the gallant action, or nominated for the award post-death. Neither seems to have occured in this case. Regards, Woody (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, okay. It's just that I have noticed Roberts' VC has been attributed as posthumous in several sources, and a few claims that his was one of the first posthumous awards due to his father's position. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:11, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- I couldn't have put it better myself David. These lists have generally defined posthumous as being killed whilst carrying out the gallant action, or nominated for the award post-death. Neither seems to have occured in this case. Regards, Woody (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Comment The link to Hyde Park needs to be disambiguated. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "from 11 October 1899 until 31 May 1902" "until"-->to.
- "The third phase began in March 1900 " Comma after here.
- "The campaign had been expected by the British government to be over within months"-->The British government had expected the campaign to be over within months
- "A campaigner, Emily Hobhouse"-->Emily Hobhouse, a campaigner,
- "Gustavus Coulson was one of the first soldiers to be directly nominated"-->Gustavus Coulson was one of the first soldiers to have been directly nominated
- "The Victoria Cross warrant was not officially amended to include posthumous awards until 1920 but one quarter of all awards for the First World War were posthumous"-->Although the Victoria Cross warrant was not officially amended to include posthumous awards until 1920, one quarter of all awards for the First World War were posthumous. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
What makes http://www.angloboerwar.com/ a reliable source?Ref 4, the page range needs an unspaced en dash.Refs with multiple page numbers should use "pp."Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Much apologies about the lateness of the reply, it seems to have slipped through my watchlist. I have done all the little issues and removed the Angloboerwar.com site as a source. I couldn't find the sourcing information for the website so can't corroborate its verifiability. All the other references say the same thing anyway. Thanks for your review. Regards. Woody (talk) 23:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Support - from what I can tell this list meets all the criteria. -MBK004 07:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
