Talk:Conscription in the United Kingdom

Military history: National / Technology / British / European / World War I / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War I task force
	World War II task force

On 6 December 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved from Conscription in Great Britain to Conscription in the United Kingdom. The result of the discussion was moved.

The point in this article[edit]

The UK has no conscription so this article is pointless. The only article needed is one about when there used to be National Service. Also this article appears to be very pro-conscription and not take neutral point of view. 88.109.55.150 (talk) 07:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this article is not pointless if you read the article it is clear that the UK has had conscription in the past and this article deals with it and also covers National Service. You have flagged it up as a POV problem but you have not explained why it is not neutral and if you could give some clues which bits (most of it is factual so cant really have a POV problem) and why then other editors may be able to help find reliable sources. MilborneOne (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikipedia were confined to current live topics, it would not be much of a resource. The original complainant half concedes this by "allowing" an article on "National Service". If by this is meant conscription post-1945 only, such an article would be seriously imbalanced.

The article did not appear to be particularly pro-conscription. It did, however, contain a number of errors, and was seriously deficient in referring to conscientious objection. These errors I have sought to correct. NB, especially, the correction in relation to the reserve element of Post-WW2 conscription - it had nothing to do with the TA or other volunteer reserve forces.

Mountdrayton (talk) 20:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legislation not referenced[edit]

According to http://www.ukat.org.uk/thesaurus/term.php?i=18336, there were five acts of parliament governing conscription in the UK during and after WW2, viz.

National Service (Armed Forces) Act 1939 c81

National Service (No 2) Act 1941 (5 & 6 Geo VI) c4

National Service Act 1941 c15

National Service Act 1948 c64

National Service Act 1950 c30

Of these, only the first and fourth are mentioned. Nor is very much said about the provisions of those acts. My attention was drawn to this when I noticed the first paragraph below the heading "After 1945" referring to the use of the term "National Service". I was called for National Service in February 1947 and that is certainly what it was known as at the time (I believe to distinguish it from Active Service). Moreover, I expected to serve the statutory period of two years, though it turned out that, because I was in the Signals Branch, my release was delayed for a further three months in response to the Berlin Airlift.

Precisely what legislation governed my service I do not know, nor whether it was act of Parliament, order in Council or what. But the impression given that the only fixed period of service was eighteen months is undoubtedly wrong.

I much regret that I do not have the information to correct it.

MikeSy (talk) 15:46, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Just before my 18th birthday, in October 1950, I joined the British Merchant Navy, which was one of the "essential services", as an apprentice. We sailed in Korean waters, and I was on the first Western ship into China after it became Communist. However, I left after 3 years, and as 8 years was required, I again became eligible for National Service. I figured I'd spent enough time in uniform, and emigrated to the only English speaking country that did not have a draft. Turned out to be Canada. The period is full of similar anecdotal evidence of how National Service impacted lives, hard to verify for this article. JohnClarknew (talk) 18:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ending of National Service/Conscription[edit]

Is it just me, or is it very difficult to determine when conscription ENDED from this article. I'm not a historian, so don't feel qualified, but surely somebody could put it in - and the legislation which enabled it?

British Empire Conscription[edit]

Should there not be a link to the article on Canada: Conscription_Crisis_of_1917 ?

Conscription in Canada was for the British Crown and offices flew the Union Jack. G. Robert Shiplett 22:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The press or Impressment[edit]

The Press gangs of the Georgian Navy were a type of conscription, albeit not as organised and restricted to the Royal Navy. I have added the link to the See Also section but not put anything into the text of the article. Should there not be some mantion? Dabbler (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History of conscription before 1900[edit]

Please add history of conscription in UK in centuries before 1900. -71.174.180.113 (talk) 02:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Conscription in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090209015402/http://www.parliament.uk:80/parliamentary_publications_and_archives/parliamentary_archives/archives____ww1_conscription.cfm to http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_publications_and_archives/parliamentary_archives/archives____ww1_conscription.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Action[edit]

Women who were conscripted in the Second World War in Britain were not expected to see any action. Is there more detail on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.37.70 (talk) 11:14, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not clear whether conscription for women started in 1939 or 1941. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.37.70 (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been 1941. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.37.70 (talk) 11:36, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article implies that women were conscripted for the first time in 1942. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.63.85 (talk) 12:59, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

resolution 1911[edit]

On 5th April 1911, the House of Lords agreed to (sry, I', no native speaker) a resolution of field marshall Frederick Sleigh Roberts (1832-1914) : Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research Vol. 87, No. 352 (Winter 2009), pp. 312-330 ([intro: 'THE LAST GLORIOUS CAMPAIGN': LORD ROBERTS, THE NATIONAL SERVICE LEAGUE AND COMPULSORY MILITARY TRAINING, 1902-1914

Can some fellow wikipedian add sth. about that to the article ? thanks in advance, --Neun-x (talk) 10:27, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Channel Islands[edit]

It seems that conscription did not apply to the Channel Islands in the 1939 to 1945 period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.192.125 (talk) 13:12, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Evacuation_of_civilians_from_the_Channel_Islands_in_1940 says that conscription did not apply to the Islands but that many volunteered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.192.125 (talk) 13:27, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Homeless[edit]

I have come across a reference to the presence of homeless men on the streets of wartime London - colloquially referred to as 'tramps, derelicts, alcoholics and beggars'. This surprised me - the numbers were as high as 200; how were they not subject to conscription? Presumably the 1939 Register was used as the basis, and if you didn't have an address you wouldn't be on it? Perhaps they were classed as 'Insane' or 'Medically unfit'? Information on this anomaly would be welcomed. Wolstan Dixie (talk) 10:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 December 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 15:16, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conscription in Great Britain → Conscription in the United Kingdom – Great Britain is not a sovereign nation, the United Kingdom is. The article "Great Britain" states right at the start that Great Britain is a geographical entity, not a political one. The only reason this article was moved to its current title appears to be that there never has been conscription in Northern Ireland, but this can be mentioned in the article as a separate section or at the lead. JIP | Talk 13:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support move. Despite the lack of historical conscription in Northern Ireland, there's no reason to locate the article at "in Great Britain" aside from the fact it's currently there. O.N.R. ^(talk) 19:48, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 02:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.