The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Discusses the experience of men from outside the traditional "officer class" who were temporarily commissioned into the British Army during the world wars. I started this way back in 2012 and it's been a long time in the making, reaching mainspace only last December, with a five year gap in the middle.
Sturmvogel 66 recently reviewed this
at GAN and kindly suggested it might be ready for A-class review. It has been a long time since I put anything through here (February 2013!) so I may be a little rusty, but I am happy to put the work in on this. I would love to be able to take this to FAC one day so please do not hold back on any comments that might be relevant there. Many thanks in advance -
Dumelow (
talk)
10:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Image review—pass
File:Robert Graves, Morrell.jpg—I nominated this for deletion at Commons because it falls under
publication right and is not free in the UK, but it could be uploaded locally as it is free under US law. (no publication right in US).
Since they're actually claiming "IWM Non-Commercial license" I would err on the side of caution, as opposed to PD-released which would be the only other option I can see. There's no death date given for the author of the photo that would put it in public domain (based on back of the envelope calculations he could well have been alive 70 years ago). (
t ·
c) buidhe14:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC)reply
I've replaced Geddes' image with a painting made by an artist who died in 1931 so that should be OK, I think? The National Library of Ireland state "No known copyright restrictions" on
their Flickr upload, but if not OK I will remove it. Thanks so much for reviewing this
buidhe, I always get confused by image licensing -
Dumelow (
talk)
12:22, 4 December 2020 (UTC)reply
The Geddes painting wouldn't be automatically free in US because 1931+70=2001, after the URAA date. Do we know when it was first exhibited (if either before 1925 or after 2003, then it would be ok to use according to
Hirtle chart)?
OK, think I've sorted it. I've found a photo of him from a 1923 issue of the Buffalo Times, New York. Which is PD by virtue of being published before 1925, I think? -
Dumelow (
talk)
11:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
NLI copyright is a tricky, it's not clear how they obtained this photograph or what they're basing the copyright status off of. I tried to check if it was published in the 11 April 1921 edition of Irish Times but the archive is paywalled.
I've replaced it with a recruitment notice from the Times of 1920, which is actually probably more interesting and relevant anyway -
Dumelow (
talk)
11:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"shortfall of 2,000 compared to theoretical full strength" I'm a little unclear what's being said here-- If I interpret it right, it may be better phrased as "2,000 below the theoretical full strength of the Army" or something
"Men who took up this offer were discharged from the regular army and appointed to temporary commissions, a process that caused problems upon demobilisation when many wished to continue their service in the army" I think this would be better placed before the sentence about Dorrell and Nelson, personally
"Some patriotic civilian employers continued to pay half wages whilst on active service such that some temporary gentlemen found themselves quite well off" I think you could manage without "patriotic", maybe add "continued to pay their employees" and perhaps quantify a bit more what "quite well off" means?
"many were ex-public school boys who had chosen to serve in the" maybe "many had attended public schools and chosen to serve in the" but not a big deal
"There was considerable favouritism shown towards those who had attended public or
grammar schools with
Officer Training Corps (OTCs). Indeed, even in this regard there was a bias towards the more well-known schools and not all former public school boys received a commission, many instead having to serve in the ranks." perhaps "There was considerable favouritism shown towards those who had attended public or
grammar schools with
Officer Training Corps (OTCs), and among those there was a bias towards more well-known schools. Not all former public school boys received a commission, instead having to serve in the ranks." but then again, maybe not
"The heavy casualties suffered by the
British Expeditionary Force saw the majority of the army's pre-war officers become casualties within the first year of the war" strikes me as somewhat redundant, maybe "[OPTIONAL: Heavy fighting saw] The majority of the
British Expeditionary Force's pre-war officers became casualties within the first year of the war" (of course casualties led to casualties)
Yes, Woolwich graduates were intended for the technical corps (such as the engineers and artillery), the source states they "continued to maintain their social exclusivity by replenishing themselves from the cream of Sandhurst and being very picky about anyone with a temporary commission" -
Dumelow (
talk)
11:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"Despite this at the end of the war it was found that more than half of all British officers" maybe "At the end of the war more than half of all British soldiers"?
"To ease their transition into officers the War Office issued several instructional pamphlets, authored by pre-war regular officers, outlining the behaviour expected of temporary officers and regular officers were posted into newly raised battalions to provide advice." I don't think this flows quite how you want it to ("issued several [...] were posted" particularly)
That's through first world war. Really an interesting, well done article. Most of my comments are minor things (like subjective phrasing comments) that may or may not be helpful. Will be back to get the rest. Cheers,
Eddie891TalkWork01:53, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"American sociologist
Willard Waller noted" I'd like a date on this, if possible ("noted in. . .")
" occupations in line with this status." might help to say "such as..."
I've reworded this and the following sentence which provides some detail on these jobs, those with "supervision and control over other men" -
Dumelow (
talk)
15:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"From this point onwards an officer would not" Think you could say "was not"
That's pretty much anything from me, I hope some of my comments/suggestions are helpful-- It really is a fascinating, well done article. Nice work!
Eddie891TalkWork19:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
One more thing: I think this article could benefit from a 'background' section explaining a couple of things, mainly the concept of 'gentleman', particularly in British society, and the background on where officers traditionally came from. You've got some stuff already, but I think it merits a dedicated section.
Eddie891TalkWork22:34, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Hi
Eddie891, I think you're right. I've made an attempt to add a background section, though it could probably do with some refining. I'd welcome suggestions. I've also added a sprinkling of information from new sources (Mansfield 2016 and Deeks 2017) that were written after I started work on this article and would be obliged if you could review the additions, many thanks -
Dumelow (
talk)
16:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)reply
" It came to be considered that the new officers should be considered gentlemen only by virtue of the commission they held," can you eliminate the repetition of 'considered' in such close proximity?
Reworded
"It was rare for temporary gentlemen to rise to senior rank." do you think it's been explained what constitutes a "senior rank" yet? If not, maybe add it-- I've read the article too many times to be sure on this one
This is a really great article, and I'm pretty impressed.
A substantial sum of money was required Although in theory, a commission could be sold only for its official value and was to be offered first to the next most senior officer in the same regiment, in practice there was also an unofficial "over-regulation price" or "regimental value" (ie bribe), which might double the official cost.
Some of the more fashionable regiments continued to discriminate, attempting to maintain their social exclusivity by preferring Sandhurst graduates over those with temporary commissions. The Guards in particular continued to vet applicants for social standing.
The experience of temporary gentlemen was different in the Australian Army which, being a small peacetime force, required that the majority of its wartime officers were former civilians or men promoted from the ranks. I think by "former civilians" the source means "reservists". The Australian permanent force was small, but the Australian Army was relatively large given the population, because conscription had been introduced in 1911.
[W]hile the officers of the first contingent were selected on the responsibility of General Bridges, the duty was afterwards transferred to selection boards consisting of the District Commandant and three senior citizen-officers. It had been complained that some of the earlier commissions had been allotted to youngsters too immature to command Australians. Fixed rules were therefore laid down by which commissions were henceforth to be given only to men of twenty-three or over. This system often noticeably failed to obtain the right type of fighting officer. Fortunately, by the time it was in operation, the Australian battalions were already fighting, and officers were obtained by selecting those men who had shown themselves leaders in actual battle, or who appeared to possess the necessary qualities. Some of the later battalions to arrive in Gallipoli were almost immediately re-staffed by the latter process. From that time forth promotion of selected men from the ranks was the system by which the A.I.F. obtained nearly all its officers.
But in the original 1st Australian Division the great majority were selected from those who were officers already. Only 24 officers out of 631 had never served before; 68 were, or had been, officers of the Australian permanent forces, including 23 Duntroon graduates; 16 were officers of the British regular army! 15 were British officers who had retired; 99 were thus professional soldiers. On the other hand 402 were officers of the old Australian militia forces, including many temporary "area-officers", and another 58 were young officers under the newly-instituted compulsory service scheme. Of the remainder, 33 were retired officers of the Australian militia, and 9 of British, colonial, or foreign territorials. Of the whole 631 there were 104 who had seen service in the South African or other wars.
— Bean I:54
An important difference from the British practice described in this article was that Australian officers commissioned from the ranks continued to serve with their original units. Australian NCOs and subalterns had higher pay than their British counterparts; an Australian lieutenant made £365 a year, more than a British captain. General officers, however, made significantly less.
Thanks for the background. I've incorporated some of the info from Bean, but would welcome any further comments on this. I think it's useful to have a comparison to the Commonwealth practice but am wary of diverging too far into this -
Dumelow (
talk)
13:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Quite right. I only included this because I thought the wording was incorrect. I've never seen the term "temporary gentlemen" in an Australian context, but some of the problem of post-war adjustment are familiar.
Hawkeye7(discuss)21:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Where was I? Inter-war period:
a status comparable to that which they held as Officers; Decapitalise "officers"
He was actually
minister without portfolio, the Ministry of Transport wasn't formed until May 1919. In the meantime he assumed an informal position co-ordinating demobilization and reconstruction. I've tried to clarify this -
Dumelow (
talk)
Are we talking here about appointments to civil service positions?
It was actually both civil service and public sector (prospective employers sent details of vacancies to the department to fill). I've tried to clarify this -
Dumelow (
talk)
13:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
former brigadier-generals acting as cooks Are we saying that some did reach general officer rank? Any names?
I couldn't find any names but Haig stated a few examples in his last dispatch, listing their former employments. I've added this -
Dumelow (
talk)
13:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
I think the article should emphasise that the temporary officers were just as good as those drawn from public schools. The problem with the latter was not one of quality, but of quantity.
Agreed, I've added a bit into a new "analysis" section (not sold on the title of this yet), with some comments on their performance (I'm looking to see if there's anything else I can add). I've also expanded on the number given battalion command -
Dumelow (
talk)
15:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Also, the article has an implication that things have changed, which is not supported by what I'm hearing about the British Army in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm recommending David French, Army, Empire and Cold War: The British Army and Military Policy 1945-1971. The proportion of cadets entering Sandhurst from public schools fell from 65 percent in 1947 to 37 percent in 1971, but the officers continued to be drawn mainly from the middle class. In the 1980s 65 percent of the Sandhurst cadets had attended private schools; this decreased to 42 percent by 2014.
[1] (Also, according to Prince Harry, the custom of sending the second son into the Army persists.)
Alas French is out of my price range. I've expanded on this a bit at the end of the WWII and later section. My figures are a little different but the trend is the same -
Dumelow (
talk)
15:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Initial comment: Tony Gould in Imperial Warriors: Britain and the Gurkhasused the term Emergency Commissioned Officer (ECO) to describe the temporary gentleman of WWII. He also says, at least as far as the British Indian Army was concerned, there was little social conflict between the regular British officers and their "temporary" lower-class counterparts; the new social conflict was between British officers and Indian officers who were termed, according to Bengali officer D.K. Palit, "WOGs (Westernised Oriental Gentlemen)." Gould was a British WWII veteran who served with the Ghurkas. -
Indy beetle (
talk)
22:58, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"One of the reasons the government favoured the purchase system was that it removed the need to provide a proper salary or pension to officers" - This implies that there are other reasons. Are the others of any significance?
"The Coldstream Guards considered £400 per year as a requirement of entry and the rest of the Household Brigade £300" - Is this entry for officers or all soldiers?
"khaki tunic on their back and a Webley .455 at their hip", The constabulary took steps to remove such men" - I think there should be a period in place of the comma
"The system was gradually reformed; after the reintroduction of conscription a General Service Corps scheme was set up to assess all new army entrants for suitability for a commission" - Can it be stated when this occurred?
I've given the year for conscription being introduced. I'm not certain on when the GSC scheme came in. I've just realised I don't have a copy of Holmes, so I've ordered one. Once it arrives I may be able to add this -
Dumelow (
talk)
References 111 and 113 have the title in sentence case, while the rest are in title case. Can this be standardized?
Bibliographic formatting is consistent with the exception of hyphens only for some ISBNs. Not a deal breaker here, but might be work picking one format or the other before FAC, which should be done once these issues are resolved.--
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
20:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Discusses the experience of men from outside the traditional "officer class" who were temporarily commissioned into the British Army during the world wars. I started this way back in 2012 and it's been a long time in the making, reaching mainspace only last December, with a five year gap in the middle.
Sturmvogel 66 recently reviewed this
at GAN and kindly suggested it might be ready for A-class review. It has been a long time since I put anything through here (February 2013!) so I may be a little rusty, but I am happy to put the work in on this. I would love to be able to take this to FAC one day so please do not hold back on any comments that might be relevant there. Many thanks in advance -
Dumelow (
talk)
10:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Image review—pass
File:Robert Graves, Morrell.jpg—I nominated this for deletion at Commons because it falls under
publication right and is not free in the UK, but it could be uploaded locally as it is free under US law. (no publication right in US).
Since they're actually claiming "IWM Non-Commercial license" I would err on the side of caution, as opposed to PD-released which would be the only other option I can see. There's no death date given for the author of the photo that would put it in public domain (based on back of the envelope calculations he could well have been alive 70 years ago). (
t ·
c) buidhe14:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC)reply
I've replaced Geddes' image with a painting made by an artist who died in 1931 so that should be OK, I think? The National Library of Ireland state "No known copyright restrictions" on
their Flickr upload, but if not OK I will remove it. Thanks so much for reviewing this
buidhe, I always get confused by image licensing -
Dumelow (
talk)
12:22, 4 December 2020 (UTC)reply
The Geddes painting wouldn't be automatically free in US because 1931+70=2001, after the URAA date. Do we know when it was first exhibited (if either before 1925 or after 2003, then it would be ok to use according to
Hirtle chart)?
OK, think I've sorted it. I've found a photo of him from a 1923 issue of the Buffalo Times, New York. Which is PD by virtue of being published before 1925, I think? -
Dumelow (
talk)
11:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
NLI copyright is a tricky, it's not clear how they obtained this photograph or what they're basing the copyright status off of. I tried to check if it was published in the 11 April 1921 edition of Irish Times but the archive is paywalled.
I've replaced it with a recruitment notice from the Times of 1920, which is actually probably more interesting and relevant anyway -
Dumelow (
talk)
11:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"shortfall of 2,000 compared to theoretical full strength" I'm a little unclear what's being said here-- If I interpret it right, it may be better phrased as "2,000 below the theoretical full strength of the Army" or something
"Men who took up this offer were discharged from the regular army and appointed to temporary commissions, a process that caused problems upon demobilisation when many wished to continue their service in the army" I think this would be better placed before the sentence about Dorrell and Nelson, personally
"Some patriotic civilian employers continued to pay half wages whilst on active service such that some temporary gentlemen found themselves quite well off" I think you could manage without "patriotic", maybe add "continued to pay their employees" and perhaps quantify a bit more what "quite well off" means?
"many were ex-public school boys who had chosen to serve in the" maybe "many had attended public schools and chosen to serve in the" but not a big deal
"There was considerable favouritism shown towards those who had attended public or
grammar schools with
Officer Training Corps (OTCs). Indeed, even in this regard there was a bias towards the more well-known schools and not all former public school boys received a commission, many instead having to serve in the ranks." perhaps "There was considerable favouritism shown towards those who had attended public or
grammar schools with
Officer Training Corps (OTCs), and among those there was a bias towards more well-known schools. Not all former public school boys received a commission, instead having to serve in the ranks." but then again, maybe not
"The heavy casualties suffered by the
British Expeditionary Force saw the majority of the army's pre-war officers become casualties within the first year of the war" strikes me as somewhat redundant, maybe "[OPTIONAL: Heavy fighting saw] The majority of the
British Expeditionary Force's pre-war officers became casualties within the first year of the war" (of course casualties led to casualties)
Yes, Woolwich graduates were intended for the technical corps (such as the engineers and artillery), the source states they "continued to maintain their social exclusivity by replenishing themselves from the cream of Sandhurst and being very picky about anyone with a temporary commission" -
Dumelow (
talk)
11:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"Despite this at the end of the war it was found that more than half of all British officers" maybe "At the end of the war more than half of all British soldiers"?
"To ease their transition into officers the War Office issued several instructional pamphlets, authored by pre-war regular officers, outlining the behaviour expected of temporary officers and regular officers were posted into newly raised battalions to provide advice." I don't think this flows quite how you want it to ("issued several [...] were posted" particularly)
That's through first world war. Really an interesting, well done article. Most of my comments are minor things (like subjective phrasing comments) that may or may not be helpful. Will be back to get the rest. Cheers,
Eddie891TalkWork01:53, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"American sociologist
Willard Waller noted" I'd like a date on this, if possible ("noted in. . .")
" occupations in line with this status." might help to say "such as..."
I've reworded this and the following sentence which provides some detail on these jobs, those with "supervision and control over other men" -
Dumelow (
talk)
15:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"From this point onwards an officer would not" Think you could say "was not"
That's pretty much anything from me, I hope some of my comments/suggestions are helpful-- It really is a fascinating, well done article. Nice work!
Eddie891TalkWork19:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
One more thing: I think this article could benefit from a 'background' section explaining a couple of things, mainly the concept of 'gentleman', particularly in British society, and the background on where officers traditionally came from. You've got some stuff already, but I think it merits a dedicated section.
Eddie891TalkWork22:34, 5 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Hi
Eddie891, I think you're right. I've made an attempt to add a background section, though it could probably do with some refining. I'd welcome suggestions. I've also added a sprinkling of information from new sources (Mansfield 2016 and Deeks 2017) that were written after I started work on this article and would be obliged if you could review the additions, many thanks -
Dumelow (
talk)
16:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)reply
" It came to be considered that the new officers should be considered gentlemen only by virtue of the commission they held," can you eliminate the repetition of 'considered' in such close proximity?
Reworded
"It was rare for temporary gentlemen to rise to senior rank." do you think it's been explained what constitutes a "senior rank" yet? If not, maybe add it-- I've read the article too many times to be sure on this one
This is a really great article, and I'm pretty impressed.
A substantial sum of money was required Although in theory, a commission could be sold only for its official value and was to be offered first to the next most senior officer in the same regiment, in practice there was also an unofficial "over-regulation price" or "regimental value" (ie bribe), which might double the official cost.
Some of the more fashionable regiments continued to discriminate, attempting to maintain their social exclusivity by preferring Sandhurst graduates over those with temporary commissions. The Guards in particular continued to vet applicants for social standing.
The experience of temporary gentlemen was different in the Australian Army which, being a small peacetime force, required that the majority of its wartime officers were former civilians or men promoted from the ranks. I think by "former civilians" the source means "reservists". The Australian permanent force was small, but the Australian Army was relatively large given the population, because conscription had been introduced in 1911.
[W]hile the officers of the first contingent were selected on the responsibility of General Bridges, the duty was afterwards transferred to selection boards consisting of the District Commandant and three senior citizen-officers. It had been complained that some of the earlier commissions had been allotted to youngsters too immature to command Australians. Fixed rules were therefore laid down by which commissions were henceforth to be given only to men of twenty-three or over. This system often noticeably failed to obtain the right type of fighting officer. Fortunately, by the time it was in operation, the Australian battalions were already fighting, and officers were obtained by selecting those men who had shown themselves leaders in actual battle, or who appeared to possess the necessary qualities. Some of the later battalions to arrive in Gallipoli were almost immediately re-staffed by the latter process. From that time forth promotion of selected men from the ranks was the system by which the A.I.F. obtained nearly all its officers.
But in the original 1st Australian Division the great majority were selected from those who were officers already. Only 24 officers out of 631 had never served before; 68 were, or had been, officers of the Australian permanent forces, including 23 Duntroon graduates; 16 were officers of the British regular army! 15 were British officers who had retired; 99 were thus professional soldiers. On the other hand 402 were officers of the old Australian militia forces, including many temporary "area-officers", and another 58 were young officers under the newly-instituted compulsory service scheme. Of the remainder, 33 were retired officers of the Australian militia, and 9 of British, colonial, or foreign territorials. Of the whole 631 there were 104 who had seen service in the South African or other wars.
— Bean I:54
An important difference from the British practice described in this article was that Australian officers commissioned from the ranks continued to serve with their original units. Australian NCOs and subalterns had higher pay than their British counterparts; an Australian lieutenant made £365 a year, more than a British captain. General officers, however, made significantly less.
Thanks for the background. I've incorporated some of the info from Bean, but would welcome any further comments on this. I think it's useful to have a comparison to the Commonwealth practice but am wary of diverging too far into this -
Dumelow (
talk)
13:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Quite right. I only included this because I thought the wording was incorrect. I've never seen the term "temporary gentlemen" in an Australian context, but some of the problem of post-war adjustment are familiar.
Hawkeye7(discuss)21:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Where was I? Inter-war period:
a status comparable to that which they held as Officers; Decapitalise "officers"
He was actually
minister without portfolio, the Ministry of Transport wasn't formed until May 1919. In the meantime he assumed an informal position co-ordinating demobilization and reconstruction. I've tried to clarify this -
Dumelow (
talk)
Are we talking here about appointments to civil service positions?
It was actually both civil service and public sector (prospective employers sent details of vacancies to the department to fill). I've tried to clarify this -
Dumelow (
talk)
13:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
former brigadier-generals acting as cooks Are we saying that some did reach general officer rank? Any names?
I couldn't find any names but Haig stated a few examples in his last dispatch, listing their former employments. I've added this -
Dumelow (
talk)
13:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
I think the article should emphasise that the temporary officers were just as good as those drawn from public schools. The problem with the latter was not one of quality, but of quantity.
Agreed, I've added a bit into a new "analysis" section (not sold on the title of this yet), with some comments on their performance (I'm looking to see if there's anything else I can add). I've also expanded on the number given battalion command -
Dumelow (
talk)
15:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Also, the article has an implication that things have changed, which is not supported by what I'm hearing about the British Army in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm recommending David French, Army, Empire and Cold War: The British Army and Military Policy 1945-1971. The proportion of cadets entering Sandhurst from public schools fell from 65 percent in 1947 to 37 percent in 1971, but the officers continued to be drawn mainly from the middle class. In the 1980s 65 percent of the Sandhurst cadets had attended private schools; this decreased to 42 percent by 2014.
[1] (Also, according to Prince Harry, the custom of sending the second son into the Army persists.)
Alas French is out of my price range. I've expanded on this a bit at the end of the WWII and later section. My figures are a little different but the trend is the same -
Dumelow (
talk)
15:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Initial comment: Tony Gould in Imperial Warriors: Britain and the Gurkhasused the term Emergency Commissioned Officer (ECO) to describe the temporary gentleman of WWII. He also says, at least as far as the British Indian Army was concerned, there was little social conflict between the regular British officers and their "temporary" lower-class counterparts; the new social conflict was between British officers and Indian officers who were termed, according to Bengali officer D.K. Palit, "WOGs (Westernised Oriental Gentlemen)." Gould was a British WWII veteran who served with the Ghurkas. -
Indy beetle (
talk)
22:58, 14 December 2020 (UTC)reply
"One of the reasons the government favoured the purchase system was that it removed the need to provide a proper salary or pension to officers" - This implies that there are other reasons. Are the others of any significance?
"The Coldstream Guards considered £400 per year as a requirement of entry and the rest of the Household Brigade £300" - Is this entry for officers or all soldiers?
"khaki tunic on their back and a Webley .455 at their hip", The constabulary took steps to remove such men" - I think there should be a period in place of the comma
"The system was gradually reformed; after the reintroduction of conscription a General Service Corps scheme was set up to assess all new army entrants for suitability for a commission" - Can it be stated when this occurred?
I've given the year for conscription being introduced. I'm not certain on when the GSC scheme came in. I've just realised I don't have a copy of Holmes, so I've ordered one. Once it arrives I may be able to add this -
Dumelow (
talk)
References 111 and 113 have the title in sentence case, while the rest are in title case. Can this be standardized?
Bibliographic formatting is consistent with the exception of hyphens only for some ISBNs. Not a deal breaker here, but might be work picking one format or the other before FAC, which should be done once these issues are resolved.--
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
20:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.