Jump to content

Talk:World War I

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 122.56.76.117 (talk) at 02:26, 4 March 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleWorld War I is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 8, 2004.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 18, 2004Refreshing brilliant proseKept
February 15, 2005Featured article reviewKept
June 26, 2007Featured article reviewKept
February 26, 2006Featured article reviewKept
June 10, 2006Featured article reviewKept
December 9, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
April 16, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
November 23, 2009WikiProject A-class reviewNot approved
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of February 2, 2008.
Current status: Former featured article

Template:Vital article

Meta has related information at: World War I edit-a-thons

war crimes should at least be mentioned in the lead

Please do not duplicate the same debate across multiple pages

War crimes have an entire section in this article. As such, the lead should at least mention that war crimes were committed by a number of nations. The WW II article, for example, mentions the Holocaust in the lead.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 00:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

World War II does not mention war crimes in the lead; it singles them out by individual events, but it doesn't specifically mention it directly as a whole by all sides. In the case of World War II, that includes war crimes commited by Italians, Soviets, and Allies, as well as the Japanese. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 01:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The manual for leads, MOS:LEAD, says the lead should summarize the article and cover "prominent controversies." The war crimes in WW I involved some very prominent controversies, such as the genocide of Armenians. The WW I article is not compelled to follow the other WW article. I have pointed out that the Algerian War article mentions war crimes in the lead. I don't see why such a short sentence ("War crimes were committed by a number of participating nations.") cannot be placed in the lead.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 17:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If important enough to mention war crimes, then they ought to be summarized to at least give context so that the reader knows if we are talking about attacks on civilians by soldiers or crimes committed on soldiers by other soldiers. "War crimes were committed by a number of participating nations" will leave a reader either saying "so?", or "so what?"GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:29, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
yes indeed, so what? I suggest only the Belgium and Armenian cases are important enough for the lede. Rjensen (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I will add the Belgium and Armenian cases to the ledeOnBeyondZebrax (talk) 20:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is an RfC underway at Vietnam War: Should the lead state "War crimes were committed by both sides"? Please comment there. Alsee (talk) 18:08, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2014

Please remove the word that appears after 1907 24.14.13.13 (talk) 04:04, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 04:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

War Crimes

The section on war crimes needs expansion. As it reads now, only the atrocities of the Central Powers and post-revolutionary Russia are considered such. NPOV, people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.35.14.90 (talk) 19:14, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Last-minute countermand failed?

I heard Lloyd Jeff Dumas mention on the radio that an order countermanding the German invasion of Luxembourg arrived half an hour too late. I assume he documents this in his book [1]. If this were corroborated, it might be interesting to add to the article or to Western Front (World War I). -- Beland (talk) 03:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

grammar editations

I would like to change some mistakes or badly written sentences, not to do anything with the informational content.

 Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request. - Arjayay (talk) 17:18, 16 February 2015 (UTC) WW1 LOL LOL[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:World_War_I&oldid=649782172"