This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope 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 |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 28, 2007. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I assume "ABC" is notable enough to leave the middle name in the article title? ugen 64 03:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Wouldn't you say Admiral Mountbatten was more famous than Admiral Cunningham? I suggest removing the sentence stating that the latter "was the most famous British admiral of World War II". -- F Sykes 14:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Although I don't agree that Cunningham was less famous than Mountbatten, I think that statement should be removed purely because it seems rather subjective. Niether one of them is so famous that they're household names, so "who's more famous" depends on who you talk to. If no one minds, i'll change it too " 'a' famous British Admiral.."
I've just gone through the article and I think it's generally well-written and informative, but there are some issues standing in the way of my support:
How on earth does this article warrant A-class let alone FA when it skirts over one of the most important periods of the war? It UTTERLY misses out the period following the battle of Crete to the Torch landings in November, 1942. This saw the sinking severe damaging of the battleships Queen Elizabeth and Valiant, the sinking of the carriers Ark Royal and Eagle, the vicious fighting surrounding the Malta convoys and general prosecution of the naval war in the face of Axis air control and the see-sawing land situation in North Africa.
There is also the controversy surrounding Cunningham's perceived lack of forethought in the naval planning for Operation Husky and the minimal interdiction provided by the navy and the Royal Air Force in the Straits of Messina.
For what it's worth the rest of the article is very good (aside from the absence of Cunningham's earliest ships, which I will find and mention). -- Harlsbottom 09:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
From the article:
...Cunningham was born in Rathmines, Dublin on 7 January 1883 and he attended several schools and colleges before he was enrolled at a Naval Academy, at the age of 10..
Maybe I don't understand the British use of the term college, but I've not heard of children under 10 enrolled in college, excepting the rare genius, and this article seems to suggest he was in a number of colleges before this age.
JordanHenderson ( talk) 00:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
The statement about Taranto being the first carrier-based air attack in history goes too far. There was at least one raid from Japanese carriers during the Sino-Japanese war in 1937; there may have been others. Okumiya, M. and Horikoshi, J., with Caidin, M., Zero, pp. 22-27; E. P. Dutton & Co. (New York, 1956). Possibly Taranto was the first carrier attack against enemy ships. That quibble aside, congratulations to the authors of this interesting article on a worthy subject. Kablammo ( talk) 00:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Your right the statement is wrong, I believe the first ever carrier mounted air raid was carried out by the RNAS from HMS Furious on the Zepplin base at Tondern, Germany (now Denmark) in 1918. The actual feat of Taranto is that it was the first time that Carrier based aircraft had independently attacked a fleet at anchor, not to mention in their home port where they should be safest... I read Yamamoto took notice of the raid even getting all the technical intel he could get from the Italians about the modified shallow water torpedoes. 2A02:C7D:C832:4C00:D4A5:20DE:BDBB:1EF ( talk) 21:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
How does this section get in there so it doesn't show up on the edit screen and cannot be edited, no matter what I do.
It also messes up the edit section links below it, everything out of whack. Gene Nygaard ( talk) 03:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Excellent article. Well done to all involved. His Knighthood (KCB) is mentioned in the table of honours at the bottom by not in the main body, unlike his DSOs. Wouldn't it be worth a mention? Epeeist smudge ( talk) 10:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Please note these is a strange "table" formed of coloured squares in a languaje that's not english, just before the first paragraph of the article. Don't know what it means, but it's pretty clear to me that it shouldn't be there. Can anyone please review and cleanup the article, if necessary?
Thanks
DPdH (
talk)
11:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC) .
Someone replaced the entire page with a few random letters. I restored it to it's original state. firstlensman 9:09, 28 November 2007 (EST)
"... schooling in Dublin and Edinburgh, Scotland". Dublin is not in Scotland.
"... enrolled at a naval academy, at the age of 10.". Is that correct? The age of 10? Hard to believe. - mbeychok ( talk) 19:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Is there no recorded cause of death? Would be extra info for the article if it could be found. SGGH speak! 22:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Would not his title actually be Andrew Cunningham, Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope and not Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope due to the fact that he did not have anyone to succeed him in the title, and there was not a 2nd Viscount? Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 07:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)) I think the fact he's a peer trumps the baronetcy (in the same way you don't bother with "sir" for a peer who's also a knight).
David Underdown (
talk)
08:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)What does everyone think about succession boxes? I think we now have a lot of boxes with little output. Shall we just wipe them all out completely?, cut them back? hide them under a master box? Or leave them as is. Personally, I think removing them altogether would be beneficial. All of the boxes are already covered in the text and add little to nothing to the article. Woody ( talk) 19:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC) Solution 1=
Succession boxes |
---|
Solution2= Cutdown: I think the baronets and Viscountcy ones are redundant given that they don't actually show any successions and it is all covered in the text. The First Sea Lord one is covered in the navbox, so again, that is redundant. Thoughts? Woody ( talk) 19:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The article seems a little unclear on what Cunningham did in late 1938-early 1940.
Three questions arise -
a) did he actually become Deputy Chief in December 1938, and then serve until mid-1939?
b) If not, did he go back to London for six months and then return to the Med in mid-1940?
c) Why did he become C-in-C Mediterranean? This isn't actually explained; did Blake formally retire due to ill-health, or was Cunningham appointed to relieve him for other reasons? Shimgray | talk | 10:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
According to his service record, Cunningham served as D.C.N.S. from November, 1938 to May, 1939. Also according to the record (from ADM 196/47) Cunningham assumed command of the Mediterranean Fleet on 7 June, 1939, and not the unreferenced 6 June which appears in this article. Cunningham succeeded Pound as Commander-in-Chief of the Mediterranean Fleet upon the latter's elevation to First Sea Lord. -- Simon Harley ( Talk | Library). 10:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Bust_of_Viscount_Cunningham_of_Hyndhope_by_Franta_Belsky{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.historynet.com/air_sea/sea-air_operations/7100391.html?page=3&c=yWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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) 04:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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) 14:57, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Bust_of_Viscount_Cunningham_of_Hyndhope_by_Franta_BelskyWhen 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) 06:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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) 06:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know when ABC was in charge of HMS Lochinvar? Clearly the current dates are wrong.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.140.168 ( talk • contribs) 12:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Content copied from WT:MILHIST:
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope 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 |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 28, 2007. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I assume "ABC" is notable enough to leave the middle name in the article title? ugen 64 03:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Wouldn't you say Admiral Mountbatten was more famous than Admiral Cunningham? I suggest removing the sentence stating that the latter "was the most famous British admiral of World War II". -- F Sykes 14:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Although I don't agree that Cunningham was less famous than Mountbatten, I think that statement should be removed purely because it seems rather subjective. Niether one of them is so famous that they're household names, so "who's more famous" depends on who you talk to. If no one minds, i'll change it too " 'a' famous British Admiral.."
I've just gone through the article and I think it's generally well-written and informative, but there are some issues standing in the way of my support:
How on earth does this article warrant A-class let alone FA when it skirts over one of the most important periods of the war? It UTTERLY misses out the period following the battle of Crete to the Torch landings in November, 1942. This saw the sinking severe damaging of the battleships Queen Elizabeth and Valiant, the sinking of the carriers Ark Royal and Eagle, the vicious fighting surrounding the Malta convoys and general prosecution of the naval war in the face of Axis air control and the see-sawing land situation in North Africa.
There is also the controversy surrounding Cunningham's perceived lack of forethought in the naval planning for Operation Husky and the minimal interdiction provided by the navy and the Royal Air Force in the Straits of Messina.
For what it's worth the rest of the article is very good (aside from the absence of Cunningham's earliest ships, which I will find and mention). -- Harlsbottom 09:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
From the article:
...Cunningham was born in Rathmines, Dublin on 7 January 1883 and he attended several schools and colleges before he was enrolled at a Naval Academy, at the age of 10..
Maybe I don't understand the British use of the term college, but I've not heard of children under 10 enrolled in college, excepting the rare genius, and this article seems to suggest he was in a number of colleges before this age.
JordanHenderson ( talk) 00:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
The statement about Taranto being the first carrier-based air attack in history goes too far. There was at least one raid from Japanese carriers during the Sino-Japanese war in 1937; there may have been others. Okumiya, M. and Horikoshi, J., with Caidin, M., Zero, pp. 22-27; E. P. Dutton & Co. (New York, 1956). Possibly Taranto was the first carrier attack against enemy ships. That quibble aside, congratulations to the authors of this interesting article on a worthy subject. Kablammo ( talk) 00:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Your right the statement is wrong, I believe the first ever carrier mounted air raid was carried out by the RNAS from HMS Furious on the Zepplin base at Tondern, Germany (now Denmark) in 1918. The actual feat of Taranto is that it was the first time that Carrier based aircraft had independently attacked a fleet at anchor, not to mention in their home port where they should be safest... I read Yamamoto took notice of the raid even getting all the technical intel he could get from the Italians about the modified shallow water torpedoes. 2A02:C7D:C832:4C00:D4A5:20DE:BDBB:1EF ( talk) 21:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
How does this section get in there so it doesn't show up on the edit screen and cannot be edited, no matter what I do.
It also messes up the edit section links below it, everything out of whack. Gene Nygaard ( talk) 03:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Excellent article. Well done to all involved. His Knighthood (KCB) is mentioned in the table of honours at the bottom by not in the main body, unlike his DSOs. Wouldn't it be worth a mention? Epeeist smudge ( talk) 10:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Please note these is a strange "table" formed of coloured squares in a languaje that's not english, just before the first paragraph of the article. Don't know what it means, but it's pretty clear to me that it shouldn't be there. Can anyone please review and cleanup the article, if necessary?
Thanks
DPdH (
talk)
11:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC) .
Someone replaced the entire page with a few random letters. I restored it to it's original state. firstlensman 9:09, 28 November 2007 (EST)
"... schooling in Dublin and Edinburgh, Scotland". Dublin is not in Scotland.
"... enrolled at a naval academy, at the age of 10.". Is that correct? The age of 10? Hard to believe. - mbeychok ( talk) 19:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Is there no recorded cause of death? Would be extra info for the article if it could be found. SGGH speak! 22:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Would not his title actually be Andrew Cunningham, Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope and not Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope due to the fact that he did not have anyone to succeed him in the title, and there was not a 2nd Viscount? Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 07:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite magazine}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)) I think the fact he's a peer trumps the baronetcy (in the same way you don't bother with "sir" for a peer who's also a knight).
David Underdown (
talk)
08:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)What does everyone think about succession boxes? I think we now have a lot of boxes with little output. Shall we just wipe them all out completely?, cut them back? hide them under a master box? Or leave them as is. Personally, I think removing them altogether would be beneficial. All of the boxes are already covered in the text and add little to nothing to the article. Woody ( talk) 19:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC) Solution 1=
Succession boxes |
---|
Solution2= Cutdown: I think the baronets and Viscountcy ones are redundant given that they don't actually show any successions and it is all covered in the text. The First Sea Lord one is covered in the navbox, so again, that is redundant. Thoughts? Woody ( talk) 19:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The article seems a little unclear on what Cunningham did in late 1938-early 1940.
Three questions arise -
a) did he actually become Deputy Chief in December 1938, and then serve until mid-1939?
b) If not, did he go back to London for six months and then return to the Med in mid-1940?
c) Why did he become C-in-C Mediterranean? This isn't actually explained; did Blake formally retire due to ill-health, or was Cunningham appointed to relieve him for other reasons? Shimgray | talk | 10:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
According to his service record, Cunningham served as D.C.N.S. from November, 1938 to May, 1939. Also according to the record (from ADM 196/47) Cunningham assumed command of the Mediterranean Fleet on 7 June, 1939, and not the unreferenced 6 June which appears in this article. Cunningham succeeded Pound as Commander-in-Chief of the Mediterranean Fleet upon the latter's elevation to First Sea Lord. -- Simon Harley ( Talk | Library). 10:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Bust_of_Viscount_Cunningham_of_Hyndhope_by_Franta_Belsky{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.historynet.com/air_sea/sea-air_operations/7100391.html?page=3&c=yWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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) 04:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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) 14:57, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Bust_of_Viscount_Cunningham_of_Hyndhope_by_Franta_BelskyWhen 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) 06:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope. 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) 06:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know when ABC was in charge of HMS Lochinvar? Clearly the current dates are wrong.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.140.168 ( talk • contribs) 12:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Content copied from WT:MILHIST: