Talk:Charles Blackader

Untitled

• Leaving this out for the moment until I can work it in - Dunn, p. 443, entry for Feb. 9th - "The GOC [Blackader] looks a bon vivant first and last, possibly a sick man."

• Who's Who gives his father as C. G. Blackader, no other details; probably not military or they'd have said. This suggests Charles George; per this a Charles George Blackader was a master at Cheltenham 1846-49; 1853-62; then at Clifton 1862-65 (see also here, and photo); then to Southampton for the 1870s and at Boulogne 1874-1889 (or later). Son of a schoolmaster, it seems...
  • I am almost completely convinced of this, but I can't find an explicit link - it's all inference. Charles George Blackader married Charlotte Louisa Dorothea _Guinand_ in 1864 in Clifton; they appear in the 1871 census living in Southampton (with children Mary, Catherine, and "Charles G") and then disappear from the census, which fits strongly with the record of Charles George; he was living in France from 1874 onwards. This suggests (probably) that Blackader was raised abroad, which explains why no record of his schooling; it also fits with French's note about him probably being relatively poor. But, annoyingly, I can't find that explicit missing link.

• No photo that I can currently find anywhere.

• A couple in Jenkins. There's also one here - Hilton DeWitt Girdwood may be worth an article; see [1], [2], Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Storming a bunker, World War I etc.

A new definition of 'success' ?

"Blackader died on 2 April 1921, at Queen Alexandra's Military Hospital, Millbank,[6] succeeded by his wife and two daughters."

This is a different definition of success than I've ever seen before. Could, mayhaps, 'survived' have been meant? Shenme (talk) 13:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Well spotted! I remember trying to put my finger on the right word and failing, but I didn't realise I'd left the bad phrasing in the final draft... Shimgray | talk | 14:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

the mad dog

"...according to one historian, he had fallen ill after 'being licked by a rabid dog' ". This is the hook that appeared on the Main Page. Who is the "historian"?--Wetman (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

This one presumably Kernel Saunters (talk) 16:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I was about to reply and say "Ekins, per the footnote", but it seems that it was someone else entirely - that particular chapter was written by Gary Sheffield, which I hadn't noticed until now. I'll clarify. Shimgray | talk | 19:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Charles Blackader/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, reading through, this should make GA without difficulty, I do, however have but a few points, though not all of them are necessarily GA requirements:

lead

• I'm not seeing the DOB or middle name cited anywhere

• Both are in Who Was Who; the middle name turns up in a few of the formal citations as well. I'd be uncomfortable with citing this in the lede or the infobox (simply because it'd seem messy) but it might be possible to work it into the early life section. Shimgray | talk | 21:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

• I took the liberty of using one of the Gazette refs for his full name. I do think the dates of birth and death should have an inline citation. Precisely where it should go is up to you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

• Why mention the Hundred Days Offensive if he was no longer in command?

• I think it's worth bringing out the idea that his long period training and preparation of the division helped lead to the notable successes it had after he was replaced - not mentioning it is a bit unfair to him, IMO. Looking over the sources again, though, this might need a bit of rewording; I'll poke it around. Shimgray | talk | 21:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Early career

• Can we be more specific about his rank when he joined the Army? According to our article, subaltern is a general term, rather like the modern-day Company-grade officer (though for some reason that article is solely about the terms use in the US)

• "Subaltern" here is meant as synonymous with "most junior officer"; I've clarified. (I forgot he joined after this was all rationalised in the 1870s) Shimgray | talk |

• Are there Gazette refs for the mentions in despatches or the DSO?

• Good question. I didn't explicitly look for them, but my search of the Gazette for his name didn't bring them up - possibly OCR issues? Shimgray | talk | 21:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

• I'm concerned about the use of the absence of the Chief Constable appointment from Who was Who as evidence that he didn't get it—isn't that unpublished synthesis?

• Not quite, I think - Who's Who is usually very good at listing official appointments like this, so I think we can take the fact they don't mention it as significant. There's a brief article on John Hall-Dalwood, who seems to have been the person who did get the job in 1907; his Who's Who entry corroborates this. We could cite it, instead, perhaps? Shimgray | talk | 21:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

• That would work. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

This is just a start and I'll return to the article in the next day or two to review the rest of it. My commentary is based on this version, for the record. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:36, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Having read through the rest of it, I don't think there are any new points that need to be addressed. I'll put the review on hold so those two minor points above can be fixed, then I'll be happy to pass it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

• Excellent. Everything has now been addressed, so I'm happy to pass this. Nice work. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Charles Blackader. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320093630/http://www.uclhistory.co.uk/ArchiveBlackadder2003.htm to http://www.uclhistory.co.uk/ArchiveBlackadder2003.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 03:00, 3 August 2017 (UTC)