![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Velvel interview took place in 2006. Papertrail 18:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Caste Marks: Style and Status in the USA is the same book as Class, A Guide Through the American Status System, but in a different edition (i.e., one is US, the other UK)? Or are they completely different books? -- little Alex ( talk) 18:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Article reassessed and graded as start class. -- dashiellx ( talk) 18:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The following information was removed from the article in this edit and this edit by User:Scott MacDonald:
Removed from the lead section:
Removed from the main article:
I'd like to know why this information was removed the article.
Green Cardamom (
talk)
16:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article could use more third-party sources, but they're not too hard to find. The Great War and Modern Memory is widely understood to be a classic (e.g. [1], [2]). Wartime was deeply controversial at the time of its publication (e.g. [3], [4]). Doing Battle, like most of his books, was reviewed by major outlets including the New York Times.
If the concern is that the article is too "positive", then I suppose one could delve into The Kitchen Wars, by Betty Fussell (Paul Fussell's ex-wife), which as one might expect paints a none-too-flattering portrait. In any case, though, the tags don't seem justified, at least to me. MastCell Talk 16:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I'm not sure Scott M has really read anything about Fussell. It just takes 10 minutes to read some articles about him to get a sense of who he is, why he is important, and what he did - and the so-called "puffry" turns into mainstream opinion. We're supposed to report on what the world says and thinks - this article seems to have underplayed or not even discuss his reputation and accomplishments. It could certainly use more sources is really the main problem, the editors who wrote it are not using sources. Green Cardamom ( talk) 17:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Paul Fussell. 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) 19:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, there. I'm not a wikipedian, but I thought I could give someone who knows how to make changes a hint on how to improve this article. I noticed the following in the article: "He landed in France in 1944 as a 20-year-old second lieutenant with the 103rd Infantry Division[8] (45th Infantry Division, according to Fussell in his article on the atom bomb in The New Republic, 1981) and was wounded while fighting in Alsace, and was awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart." This suggests that there is some confusion. In fact, Paul Fussell was a member of the 103d Infantry Division and was wounded, I believe, in mid-February 1945, the day that the 103d began the Spring offensive. After he recuperated, he was sent to the 45th ID, an adjacent unit in the same region. (If you were sent back to the hospital, there was no policy of returning you to the same unit, a much criticized aspect of the American way of fighting WWII.) So, this is the unit he was training with when the bomb was dropped in Japan. This reconciles his two different accounts, both of which are correct. If you want to verify he was in the 103d, he was interviewed in Richard Stannard's book Infantry Battalion, which is all about his unit. Toodle pip! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2601:80:4580:1270:51B7:9E45:3AF7:BEE2 (
talk)
02:10, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Velvel interview took place in 2006. Papertrail 18:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Caste Marks: Style and Status in the USA is the same book as Class, A Guide Through the American Status System, but in a different edition (i.e., one is US, the other UK)? Or are they completely different books? -- little Alex ( talk) 18:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Article reassessed and graded as start class. -- dashiellx ( talk) 18:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The following information was removed from the article in this edit and this edit by User:Scott MacDonald:
Removed from the lead section:
Removed from the main article:
I'd like to know why this information was removed the article.
Green Cardamom (
talk)
16:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The article could use more third-party sources, but they're not too hard to find. The Great War and Modern Memory is widely understood to be a classic (e.g. [1], [2]). Wartime was deeply controversial at the time of its publication (e.g. [3], [4]). Doing Battle, like most of his books, was reviewed by major outlets including the New York Times.
If the concern is that the article is too "positive", then I suppose one could delve into The Kitchen Wars, by Betty Fussell (Paul Fussell's ex-wife), which as one might expect paints a none-too-flattering portrait. In any case, though, the tags don't seem justified, at least to me. MastCell Talk 16:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I'm not sure Scott M has really read anything about Fussell. It just takes 10 minutes to read some articles about him to get a sense of who he is, why he is important, and what he did - and the so-called "puffry" turns into mainstream opinion. We're supposed to report on what the world says and thinks - this article seems to have underplayed or not even discuss his reputation and accomplishments. It could certainly use more sources is really the main problem, the editors who wrote it are not using sources. Green Cardamom ( talk) 17:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Paul Fussell. 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) 19:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, there. I'm not a wikipedian, but I thought I could give someone who knows how to make changes a hint on how to improve this article. I noticed the following in the article: "He landed in France in 1944 as a 20-year-old second lieutenant with the 103rd Infantry Division[8] (45th Infantry Division, according to Fussell in his article on the atom bomb in The New Republic, 1981) and was wounded while fighting in Alsace, and was awarded the Bronze Star and Purple Heart." This suggests that there is some confusion. In fact, Paul Fussell was a member of the 103d Infantry Division and was wounded, I believe, in mid-February 1945, the day that the 103d began the Spring offensive. After he recuperated, he was sent to the 45th ID, an adjacent unit in the same region. (If you were sent back to the hospital, there was no policy of returning you to the same unit, a much criticized aspect of the American way of fighting WWII.) So, this is the unit he was training with when the bomb was dropped in Japan. This reconciles his two different accounts, both of which are correct. If you want to verify he was in the 103d, he was interviewed in Richard Stannard's book Infantry Battalion, which is all about his unit. Toodle pip! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2601:80:4580:1270:51B7:9E45:3AF7:BEE2 (
talk)
02:10, 29 August 2019 (UTC)