Jump to content

Talk:Captain Tom Moore: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 170: Line 170:
: [moved from my talk page]
: [moved from my talk page]
: The minutiae of regimental mergers are not relevant in the middle of a section on Moore's charitable endeavours. The text you removed in your most recent edit, which I have restored {{tq|"...the 1st Battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment, the regiment into which the DWR were merged in 2006."}} is factually correct and supported by sources; and does not say "the DWR merged into the 1st Bn Yorkshire Regiment". Links are provided for people wanting to know the complete details. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 11:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
: The minutiae of regimental mergers are not relevant in the middle of a section on Moore's charitable endeavours. The text you removed in your most recent edit, which I have restored {{tq|"...the 1st Battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment, the regiment into which the DWR were merged in 2006."}} is factually correct and supported by sources; and does not say "the DWR merged into the 1st Bn Yorkshire Regiment". Links are provided for people wanting to know the complete details. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 11:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

::Sorry I didn't spot the minor rewording (addition of 'the regiment into which it was merged'). I agree that simple change of wording is better, as it does not imply the regiment was merged into the 1st Bn. The word 'merged' is also incorrect in usage, as there was nothing to 'merge' into. On 6 June 2006 three seperate regiments 'amalgamated' to form the Yorkshire Regiment. I do though feel that you could have retained the supporting reference I supplied to the in depth details in the DWR's Veterans associations website. There is additional info about Tom on their Website:- http://www.dwr.org.uk/2020/04/19/tom-moore/ Lewis.

Revision as of 11:56, 3 May 2020

Merge

I have merged Captain Tom Moore into this article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not In The News

I suggested that Moore's fundraising should feature on the main page, in the "In The News" section.

The proposal was closed as "Consensus will not develop to post."

Sample quote:

I'm not seeing [news coverage] which indicates to me that the story has the level of significance necessary...

Some days i wonder why we bother... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:50, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would be good to see this article on the main page. Any plans to propose for DYK? Whizz40 (talk) 11:06, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not on my part, but feel free. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly international news now, so should another ITN be attempted?

and many, many more. he's also the biggest ever individual fundraiser on JustGiving, beating the last record holder by twice as much and more, plus the fastest-ever. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.245.76 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gift Aid

Does anyone have a citation for the gift aid figure? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:39, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to be included on the JustGiving website and I can't see why it wouldn't be. Until there is a citation for it, it shouldn't be re-added. Woody (talk) 12:05, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Tabletop123 (Tabletop123). Expanded by Pigsonthewing (talk). Nominated by Whizz40 (talk) at 15:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • I would suggest using the second one, but amending it to say "99-year-old Captain Tom Moore" and would suggest that "walking laps of his garden" would be more accurate than "walking around his garden". The latter implies that he just walked around a bit. Dcfc1988 (talk) 22:46, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would be good to schedule this for 30 April, his 100th birthday, and re-word accordingly. We could also mention his UK number one single; and in any case should update the sum raised, which is still climbing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:02, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Very interesting man, with a life worth mentioning on this encyclopedia. I've updated the amount raised to over £28.7 million, per the current stats in his article. Whomever adds this to a queue and whomever adds this to the main page should feel free to update it again if seen fit. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 22:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alt1c, as suggested by Andy, remains interesting, I think, and is quite incredible for a 100 year old, and also meets criteria. What do others think? The move request is ongoing but a consensus appears to be forming. I asked that it be closed before the article goes on the Main page; if not I would just suggest we remove the tag for that day as it is not an orange or red tag. Does that work? Whizz40 (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT1c is just a bunch of information about someone who's 100 years old. It tells you everything you need to know and there's no need to click on the article. ALT1b, with the words by walking laps of his garden adds some hookiness interest and would make me want to click on it to find out more. Yoninah (talk) 17:25, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree Alt1b as updated for the exact total. And Captain Tom Moore in the hook even if they haven't agreed to move it back yet (which they should notwithstandng policy arguments). The idea of raising money by walking laps is what he is know for. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:00, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yoninah, I don't think this nomination should risk missing its special occasion date—a hundredth birthday, about as special as you can get—because of a move discussion. Let's get it into prep now. If the article is moved before April 30 (I'm assuming we're going for the 00:00 UTC set), we change the bold link in the hook and the first parameter of the DYKmake and DYKnom templates for it. If it hasn't as of 24 hours before, we request in the move discussion that the move not happen right before or while the article is on the main page. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 April 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved per WP:SNOW, which I feel is pretty safe to invoke at this point. (closed by non-admin page mover) Nohomersryan (talk) 00:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Moore (fundraiser) → Tom's 100th Birthday Walk For The NHS – All coverage of this person focuses on the event (WP:BIO1E) and this is the official and commonly heard name for the event. It would be better to move to the event name and refocus the article to be about the event, with a background section on his earlier life. buidhe 17:25, 22 April 2020 (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.

Requested move 25 April 2020

Tom Moore (fundraiser) → Captain Tom Moore – Continuing on from the previous move discussion, proposing move to Captain Tom Moore per WP:COMMONNAME. When searching in Google for "Tom Moore" the most common results are "Captain Tom Moore".[1]. Note: this article is scheduled to be on the main page on April 30th for the subject's 100th birthday, would be good to close this move discussion before then if possible. Whizz40 (talk) 06:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JHunterJ, ST47, and Andrew Gray: I don't think the army rank is being used as a disambiguator in this case, or particularly as a 'rank' really. It is being used more because it is the only way his name is ever written in the sources, it's part of his public persona. It's a sort of term of fondness or familiarity, tempered with deep respect. It's a bit like Colonel Sanders. -- DeFacto (talk). 15:43, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Arcturus: I think a common name stands, whoever "manufactured" it, and this is definitely his common name. I think it's more like a brand (similar to Colonel Sanders) or even a term of endearment, than an "informality". -- DeFacto (talk). 09:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. If we go with that approach the article about Bernard Montgomery would need to be renamed "Monty". I can't find any examples of military men with an article title using a nickname (of course there may be some). Also, if you're going to invoke WP:COMMONNAME then the article would be called "Captain Tom". Arcturus (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Many people are commonly referred to using their ranks, titles, etc. We don't do it; that's our house style. No reason to make an exception here. The title is fine as it is. Although he is a former army officer (war substantive only, not career), he's not notable for being an army officer; he's notable for being a fundraiser. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Emphasize the event, not the person: I don't agree our famous WP:COMMONNAME rule applies here despite of this rule being quoted by so many of our colleagues above as an argument. I've read the article carefully... thrice. I don't want to belittle Tom Moore's achievement. I admire it and he has done a wonderful job, I must say. But as a whole, based on my reading of the article, there is nothing notable in his military career, and I must admit everything he did in his 100 years is not notable.... except for this last "walk" event at the age of 100. He ran a small charity campaign to collect 1000 pounds, the British public was fascinated and the event flourished into a gradually developing multi-million pounds campaign and all the power to him, let it flourish into 50 million or more, and more power to the supporting public as well. I hope the song brings in tonnes of more millions. We need it. However, a fundamental question that we must ask ourselves is this. Had it not been this 100 lap walking pledge of Mr. Moore, would we have had a Wikipedia article about the gentleman? If the answer as I expect is a clear no (unless we can come up with other notable deeds that he has done or achieved), it makes this particular event a one-event case, and as with almost all one-event cases, it is the event that needs to be reflected in the Wikipedia title, not the person himself. So Captain Tom Moore, Captain Tom and Tom Moore (fundraiser) should be all redirects and we come up with the event as a title for our article, say 2020 Walk for the NHS. My opinion may not be popular, but knowing how Wikipedia articles are formulated, this is a one-event thing. werldwayd (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I've commented out the hatnote, as the article is due to be on the main page shortly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The proposed move would violate Wikipedia's naming conventions. Nick-D (talk) 10:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Honorary Colonel

There seems to be two schools of thought about whether being an "Honorary Colonel" is "promotion to the rank of Colonel". Most Honrary Colonels listed by the army ([3]) hold some other rank than "Colonel". Perhaps our MILHIST colleagues can advise on how we should express this, and/ or update Colonel (United Kingdom)#Honorary Colonel? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Tom Moore is now a "Colonel of the Regiment" or Honorary Colonel, (that is, he's the Patron), of the Army Foundation College. There are a lot of different titles used for honorary colonels - Prince Harry was Captain General Royal Marines; you will find a Vice Admiral of the United Kingdom; all purely ceremonial and for lobbying for the regiment/organisation's interests. Best article is Colonel-in-chief rather that the colonel article. Right now Captain Tom Moore needs to be added at the very bottom of the list to Colonel-in-chief#United Kingdom - Combat Service Support. However, I've just checked; Colonel (United Kingdom)#Ceremonial usage covers it; any of those top three usages are practically the same. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Buckshot06: Thank you. The pressing issue is, is it correct to refer to him as "Colonel Thomas Moore" in the lede and infobox? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The rank is entire useable and a correct form of address is Colonel Moore but going on WP:Commonname Captain Tom is always likely to be the name he is known by. I'm just sorry they didn't make him a Major, so we could have endless arguments on the primary topic of Major Tom! Nthep (talk) 09:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You ask about referring to him as "Colonel Thomas Moore" in the lead. The convention is to only begin with rank when it's 1-star or above, so the way you have it now is fine. In the same vein, I wouldn't bother putting ""Captain" (or "Colonel") above his name in the infobox. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, this isn't the convention at all. Many of our articles use lower ranks in the lede if that's how the individuals are commonly referred to. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My (slightly above) layman's understanding is that it would be perfectly correct to refer to/address him as Colonel when he's specifically acting as colonel of the unit e.g. if he attended an event at the AFC, he would be introduced as and you would properly address him in those circumstances as Colonel Moore. He is however not a substantive colonel, so in other circumstances should be addressed by his actual rank of Captain. - Chrism would like to hear from you 19:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Refer to him, in military terms, as Captain Tom Moore, Honorary Colonel, Army Foundation College. The infobox should have the topmost word as Captain, not Hon. Colonel. Should there be any reference to his honorary colonelcy, it has to include the words "Army Foundation College." Thus possibly, should you need an abbreviated title, it would be "Captain Tom Moore, Honorary Colonel, AFC." Buckshot06 (talk) 03:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's some additional back ground here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou Andy. That is official from MOD Army Department; use that as a reference for how to refer to him; it's specific to him and up-to-date. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Please restore the original excellent photo of Captain Tom in his prime, even if you keep the current one at the head of the article; I’m sure it’s how may people would wish to remember him, notwithstanding his later achievements. Paul Magnussen (talk) 19:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted from Wikimedia Commons as a copyright violation; besides, Moore is clearly "in his prime" today. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yorkshire Regiment Medal

I have again removed details of Moore's Yorkshire Regiment Medal, which was awarded for his civilian charitable activity, from the section on his military service. It is - rightly - in the section on the recognition of his civilian charitable activity. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JustGiving

The only source for the JustGiving: Captain Tom Moore's 100th Birthday Walk for the NHS campaign total figure, raised "by the time the campaign closed at the end of that day", is this one. The last donation was 24 minutes ago, so it's still running and hasn't closed? And that wasn't the total at the end of yesterday? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[ec] The JustGiving page ceased accepting donations at midnight at the end of Moore's birthday; there as a small - insignificant - increase in the amount after that, presumably due to a lag in their systems. Although the citation is dated 1 May, I added that a few minutes after midnight. I have restored the text to that effect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the website say the last donation of £20, by an anonymous donor, was made 50 minutes ago? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The figure in the article main body is now £32,795,725. The figure in the source is £32,795,312. Maybe we should say "over £32.79 million" in both places? But that source still lacks any figure for the "end of 30 April".Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"presumably due to a lag in their systems" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Accounting can be messy. Money transfer, credit card, or paypal all can take time.PrisonerB (talk) 11:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've now tweaked the wording to account for this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regimental merger

Hello I note you reverted my edit and reference to factual information on the Tom Moore (fundraiser) Page, regarding the bit about the DWR being merged into the 1st Bn Yorkshire Regiment. I have reverted that and explained why in the Edit Summary. I can understand the need to keep an article factual, but to state something that is blatantly incorrect is not a good idea. Especially as it does not tie in with Other wikipedia articles. May I suggest that you take a look at the Yorkshire Regiment article, specifically the sub para on the regiments formation. Regards Lewis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.216.145 (talk • contribs) 12:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[moved from my talk page]
The minutiae of regimental mergers are not relevant in the middle of a section on Moore's charitable endeavours. The text you removed in your most recent edit, which I have restored "...the 1st Battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment, the regiment into which the DWR were merged in 2006." is factually correct and supported by sources; and does not say "the DWR merged into the 1st Bn Yorkshire Regiment". Links are provided for people wanting to know the complete details. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I didn't spot the minor rewording (addition of 'the regiment into which it was merged'). I agree that simple change of wording is better, as it does not imply the regiment was merged into the 1st Bn. The word 'merged' is also incorrect in usage, as there was nothing to 'merge' into. On 6 June 2006 three seperate regiments 'amalgamated' to form the Yorkshire Regiment. I do though feel that you could have retained the supporting reference I supplied to the in depth details in the DWR's Veterans associations website. There is additional info about Tom on their Website:- http://www.dwr.org.uk/2020/04/19/tom-moore/ Lewis.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Captain_Tom_Moore&oldid=954619452"