Talk:Evelyn Wood (British Army officer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More[edit]

He also subsequently at Sindhora, rescued, with the help of a duffadar and a sowar, a Potail from a band of robbers who had captured the man

Could someone explain these terms? Bastie 19:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evelyn Wood (British Army officer) → Evelyn Wood – Google returns more results for the Army officer than the teacher, Sir Evelyn Wood returns 189,000 results whereas Evelyn Wood teacher returns 186,000. Also, the army officer is of more prominence, being a Victoria Cross recipient. Also the article on the teacher is of really poor quality and would definitely not exemplify Wikipedia's best work. Whereas this is a decent article. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 8:52pm • 10:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I support moving it to Evelyn Wood. It seems clear to me that the army officer is the primary topic looking at whatlinkshere and google searches. Whatlinkshere gives about 300 for the army officer in article space with only 7 for the teacher. A more accurate google search would be Evelyn Wood soldier which brings 1,110,000 results. Although google search is a very primitive test, I think it offers a basic clear result. I don't think the quality of the article should be a consideration, if it doesn't look good, clean it up so it does. Woody (talk) 11:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although I agree that the Army officer's article is well done, the number of results between these two persons is almost exactly the same on Google; a mere 1% difference. If anything, this is convincing not to move. Also, outside the UK, and especially in the US, mentioning "Evelyn Wood" as a tangential or popular culture reference nearly always refers to the teacher, not some historical military figure. Therefore, differentiation as it stands is my suggestion.--SidP (talk) 13:39, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Google hits are no longer the state of the art way to measure this sort of thing. Evelyn_Wood_(British_Army_officer) got 830 views last month, compared to 1607 for Evelyn Wood (teacher). Kauffner (talk) 14:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually both are useful; we should work for stability, not quiver every time view counts vary. But Oppose; in addition to the above, we do not make bad articles harder to get to; sweeping them under the rug will delay their being fixed. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- As this is a dabpage with only two entries, the teacher can conveniently be dealt with in a hatnote, so that it will take no more clicks to reach that article than at present. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - except for the anomaly on the 20th, the page views are pretty much the same. Marcus Qwertyus 04:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Without the "(British_Army_officer)" disambiguator in the article title, a lot of readers will pick the wrong article. Kauffner (talk) 13:41, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Should explanation of Victoria Cross be in lead paragraph[edit]

Several editors are disagreeing over whether there should be an explanation of the Victoria Cross in the lead paragraph. I have reverted to the original version before the edit war started (that is, no explanation) for the following reason:

The lead paragraph is meant to summarize the subject of the wiki, which in this case is not the Victoria Cross, but Evelyn Wood. If an in-depth explanation of the Victoria Cross is needed, it should be placed in the paragraph detailing how Wood earned the medal.

That being said, if a good explanation for the other case can be made, I am willing to consider it.Guinness323 (talk) 15:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is now virtually nothing in the lede which is not great really is it? The lede is supposed to summarise all the key aspects of the subjects life. The VC (Victoria Cross) is the highest decoration for bravery in the British award system and few people ever receive it and so is one of the major aspects of the subjects life. Deleting key information from an article is usually considered vandalism hence my reversal. The edit summary provided by the anon editor did not consider this information You will note that the information has been there for 'ages' and was only recently deleted so a reversal should be to the deleted text which I restored. Kernel Saunters (talk) 11:14, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this is the consensus version [1] Kernel Saunters (talk) 11:16, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lede now expanded to meet requirement of WP:Lede Kernel Saunters (talk) 11:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

qualified barrister[edit]

The article states that Wood was a qualified barrister. When and where did he attain this qualification? Adelshaus (talk) 11:53, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In 1874 - it's in the article. The book did not say whether or not he did pupillage which I think in those days used to happen before one was called, but it did say he was called. Nowadays I think an aspiring barrister does the bar course, eats the requisite number of dinners at his Inn, and is then called (making him technically a barrister), then does pupillage which entitles him to practise if he can find a tenancy somewhere. For what it's worth, George Macdonogh also read for the bar in his spare time whilst at Staff College.Paulturtle (talk) 02:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC) It's also mentioned in his ODNB article, although it just says he was "called to the bar in 1874" and gives no further details (it's possible the writers are just copying one another, of course). Presumably he had done his studies earlier, before the Ashanti War, and it seems safe to say he never practised.Paulturtle (talk) 04:22, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He entered the Middle Temple as a student 30 April 1870 and was called to the bar on 30 April 1874 (Foster's Men-at-the-Bar (1885) p. 517). Opera hat (talk) 07:24, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Presumably he did his studies whilst serving at Aldershot in the early 1870s, as that's pretty near London. We don't know why he wasn't called until after his return from the Ashanti War: there may have been some technical reason like still having a dinner or two to eat, or he may just not have got around to it.Paulturtle (talk) 13:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Evelyn Wood (British Army officer). 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: 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) 18:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Evelyn Wood (British Army officer). 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: 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) 16:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Evelyn Wood (British Army officer). 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: 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) 12:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Evelyn_Wood_(British_Army_officer)&oldid=1210039826"