Support Nice work. Do you have a citation for the Windsor knot thing? Also, did you catch Yomangani's suggestion
here about the "honours, titles, styles, etc." sections? Might be something to mull over. Anyway, very well done!
Gzkn 08:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Thanks! Citation added. Yes, I'm following the discussion
there and
here and will amend the section title accordingly once a consensus is built.
DrKiernan 09:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support with caveat I peer-reviewed this article and I think it is quite good, but I still have a small concern regarding the lead. I think that there is a tad too much detail about the abdication and not enough about the rest of his life.
WP:LEADAwadewit 10:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Please take a look at the new lead.
DrKiernan 12:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Definitely an improvement.
Awadewit 19:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support. I think all the concerns raised in the article's review are addressed.--
Yannismarou 15:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support — excellent work as usual. — Deckiller 16:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support with caveat — Very good. Are the military ranks correct, though? He was appointed in War Office at the very beginning of WWII before being appointed governor. Also, during his speech to parliament and the funerals of King George VI and of Queen Mary, he wore the uniform of an admiral.
Tomhormby 06:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)reply
He temporarily relinquished the ranks of Admiral of the Fleet, Field Marshal and Marshal of the Royal Air Force to assume that of Major-General in 1939, because the Head of the British Military Mission was a Major-General and you couldn't have a Field Marshal serving under an officer of lower rank. Full details of his military service are here:
[1].
DrKiernan 08:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Looks like the offending section was blanked. The entry on George VI doesn't have a rank section, so I support. Some of the citations aren't complete (ISBN's and whatnot), but I can add a lot of those. Esp. for Donaldson.
Tomhormby 14:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
Support Nice work. Do you have a citation for the Windsor knot thing? Also, did you catch Yomangani's suggestion
here about the "honours, titles, styles, etc." sections? Might be something to mull over. Anyway, very well done!
Gzkn 08:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Thanks! Citation added. Yes, I'm following the discussion
there and
here and will amend the section title accordingly once a consensus is built.
DrKiernan 09:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support with caveat I peer-reviewed this article and I think it is quite good, but I still have a small concern regarding the lead. I think that there is a tad too much detail about the abdication and not enough about the rest of his life.
WP:LEADAwadewit 10:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Please take a look at the new lead.
DrKiernan 12:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Definitely an improvement.
Awadewit 19:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support. I think all the concerns raised in the article's review are addressed.--
Yannismarou 15:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support — excellent work as usual. — Deckiller 16:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Support with caveat — Very good. Are the military ranks correct, though? He was appointed in War Office at the very beginning of WWII before being appointed governor. Also, during his speech to parliament and the funerals of King George VI and of Queen Mary, he wore the uniform of an admiral.
Tomhormby 06:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)reply
He temporarily relinquished the ranks of Admiral of the Fleet, Field Marshal and Marshal of the Royal Air Force to assume that of Major-General in 1939, because the Head of the British Military Mission was a Major-General and you couldn't have a Field Marshal serving under an officer of lower rank. Full details of his military service are here:
[1].
DrKiernan 08:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)reply
Looks like the offending section was blanked. The entry on George VI doesn't have a rank section, so I support. Some of the citations aren't complete (ISBN's and whatnot), but I can add a lot of those. Esp. for Donaldson.
Tomhormby 14:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.