Haldane Reforms has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 16, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
Haldane Reforms of 1906–1912 included the creation of the
British Expeditionary Force and the
Territorial Force? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A very readable article, which appears to have most, if not all, the necessary attributes of a GA. I have noticed that it is based on only two references; more would be better, but it will not be "failed" on that point as the article appears to be compliant with WP:verify.
I would like to pose one question, which is related to the Scope. The article appears (this is not my "specialist" subject) to adequately explain what the Haldane Reforms were and why they were necessary, i.e. to fix "defects" in the system and they were a continuation of the Cardwell Reforms, Childers Reforms, and the Esher Report. What the article does not discuss is were they successful and long lasting, or did some more reforms need to follow in their wake?
I suspect that, whatever the answer, I might be tempted to say that the article (and the lead) should cover that question; but that is pre-judging an answer that I've not yet heard. Pyrotec ( talk) 19:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
I've added a 'WW I' section. There's not much in it, but it provides a place to discuss the effectiveness of the reforms; and I've copied some of your text into it from the lede and slightly expanded it. I'm now going to close off this review. Pyrotec ( talk) 18:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A wide-ranging, readable article on these early-20th century reforms of the British Army.
Congratulations on the quality of the article, I'm awarding GA status; however, I still think that a suitable navigation box to link the various British Army refroms would be helpful to readers. Pyrotec ( talk) 18:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Shimgray, Pyrotec, Rjensen, Iridescent This excellent article does not seem to have had much in substantive additions since 2009. In light of the well-reviewed new biography of Haldane, I propose a few lines of additional material aimed at showing Haldane's intention before he had to navigate Parliament. Two principal points: first the underpinning of many of Haldane's reforms, including the establishment of the Territorial Force, and the founding of the Officer Training Corps, was to build on Cardwell's aim to bring the Army and the wider public closer together and achieve the potential for a 'nation at arms' at an affordable price. Secondly, he always intended that the Territorial Force - which was much larger than the Regular Army - should provide a second line for overseas operations but had to write the provisions on Home Service into the legislation to get it past the Conservative majority in the House of Lords. (This is already hinted at in the wording at the end of the section in the current article on the First World War). A third point would be that I seem to remember that Haldane also fought to set up OTCs in grammar schools but was blocked by political opposition from another quarter - can anyone help with a source on that as I cannot find one? If not, I will leave it out. Given the special status of this article, I thought I should post here before having a stab at it. Any views? Julian Brazier ( talk) 11:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Haldane Reforms has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 16, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
Haldane Reforms of 1906–1912 included the creation of the
British Expeditionary Force and the
Territorial Force? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A very readable article, which appears to have most, if not all, the necessary attributes of a GA. I have noticed that it is based on only two references; more would be better, but it will not be "failed" on that point as the article appears to be compliant with WP:verify.
I would like to pose one question, which is related to the Scope. The article appears (this is not my "specialist" subject) to adequately explain what the Haldane Reforms were and why they were necessary, i.e. to fix "defects" in the system and they were a continuation of the Cardwell Reforms, Childers Reforms, and the Esher Report. What the article does not discuss is were they successful and long lasting, or did some more reforms need to follow in their wake?
I suspect that, whatever the answer, I might be tempted to say that the article (and the lead) should cover that question; but that is pre-judging an answer that I've not yet heard. Pyrotec ( talk) 19:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
I've added a 'WW I' section. There's not much in it, but it provides a place to discuss the effectiveness of the reforms; and I've copied some of your text into it from the lede and slightly expanded it. I'm now going to close off this review. Pyrotec ( talk) 18:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A wide-ranging, readable article on these early-20th century reforms of the British Army.
Congratulations on the quality of the article, I'm awarding GA status; however, I still think that a suitable navigation box to link the various British Army refroms would be helpful to readers. Pyrotec ( talk) 18:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Shimgray, Pyrotec, Rjensen, Iridescent This excellent article does not seem to have had much in substantive additions since 2009. In light of the well-reviewed new biography of Haldane, I propose a few lines of additional material aimed at showing Haldane's intention before he had to navigate Parliament. Two principal points: first the underpinning of many of Haldane's reforms, including the establishment of the Territorial Force, and the founding of the Officer Training Corps, was to build on Cardwell's aim to bring the Army and the wider public closer together and achieve the potential for a 'nation at arms' at an affordable price. Secondly, he always intended that the Territorial Force - which was much larger than the Regular Army - should provide a second line for overseas operations but had to write the provisions on Home Service into the legislation to get it past the Conservative majority in the House of Lords. (This is already hinted at in the wording at the end of the section in the current article on the First World War). A third point would be that I seem to remember that Haldane also fought to set up OTCs in grammar schools but was blocked by political opposition from another quarter - can anyone help with a source on that as I cannot find one? If not, I will leave it out. Given the special status of this article, I thought I should post here before having a stab at it. Any views? Julian Brazier ( talk) 11:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)