Talk:John Raymond Broadbent (major general)

	Australia portal John Raymond Broadbent (major general) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group.

Military history: Biography / South Pacific Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force

Untitled

There are 2 people called John Raymond Broadbent in the Australian Military. The first John Raymond Broadbent was born in 1893 in Victoria and is the subject of an article. He was awarded a CBE. The second one I had sought to enter as John Raymond* Broadbent (which is the way that the AWM distinguishes between them. This one picked up a DSO in 1944 and CBE in 1967. He finished as Commander 2 Div with the rank of Major General. It would be good to see both listed if you can work out how. For confirmation see the following link to the Australian War Memorial where the Honours and Awards made to each can be verified: http://www.awm.gov.au/honours/honours/results.asp?fn=broadbent&sn=broadbent&c=W2

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move

The moves were performed by Pdfpdf (talk · contribs). See below. Cunard (talk) 22:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Raymond Broadbent (1914-2006) → John Raymond Broadbent (1914–2006) — year ranges use an endash per WP:DATE. — Rjwilmsi 19:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ - Surely this is uncontroversial? Pdfpdf (talk) 04:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as MOScruft. It would be better to find out their relationship and disambiguate by that. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:58, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the MOS calls anywhere for date ranges to be used as qualifiers (though if I am wrong, this RM is uncontroversial and should be enacted). So we need another solution. I think using army titles as qualifiers for this article and John Raymond Broadbent (1893–1972) is the correct course of action. If the closer agrees, he will need to move this article and the one I just listed. This article would have (Major General) as the qualifier, and Broadbent 1893–1972 would have (Brigadier). Another option would be to attach Major General and Brigadier before John Raymond Broadbent in each article. This is more elegant and the optimal solution in my mind, but I do not know if the MOS says anything about such titles. ÷seresin 09:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Anything MOS says about article titles is out of line; article titles are decided by our naming conventions. This is just as well, since most of MOS is neither useful nor consensus. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I support "(1914-2006)" being changed. I think changing to (Brigadier) and (Major General) is a better option than "(1914&endash2006)". If it's restricted to a choice between "(1914-2006)" and "(1914&endash2006)", (although I personally prefer "(1914-2006)"), it seems that "the standard" has become "(1914&endash2006)". Perhaps we need a revised proposal? Pdfpdf (talk) 03:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support there are few other options for disambiguation apart from dates, but I would support say "Infantry officer" and "Quartermaster", which describes their military roles. Ranks are unwise because they were both Brigadiers at some point. DrKiernan (talk) 15:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

John Raymond Broadbent (1914-2006) → John Raymond Broadbent (Major General) - Better disambiguator. Pdfpdf (talk) 03:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Fine by me. Rjwilmsi 14:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Lack of) Action

If there are no objections in the next 48 hours, someone will move:

--Pdfpdf (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ They were both brigadiers at some point. DrKiernan (talk) 15:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't follow your logic. Only one of them was a Major General. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support for the younger; Oppose for the elder Yes, fine so Major General can be used, but they were both brigadiers: the elder in 1945 and the younger in 1956–8, so that shouldn't be used. DrKiernan (talk) 15:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from Talk:John Raymond Broadbent (1893–1972)

Oppose They were both brigadiers at some point in their careers. Use either dates or professions, i.e. "Infantry officer", "Quartermaster". DrKiernan (talk) 15:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't follow your logic about both Brigadiers; only one of them was a Major General. However, I can see merit in using profession. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how about "Major General" and "Quartermaster"? DrKiernan (talk) 15:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another proposal

Pdfpdf (talk) 23:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC) on behalf of User:DrKiernan[reply]

Support - Yeah. Anything relevant that isn't a date that identifies them AND distinguishes between them. Pdfpdf (talk) 23:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fine - especially since the QM corps (is it a corps in Oz?) seems to be a defining characteristic of the elder's career.Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rjwilmsi 10:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done

I have moved:

And more tediously, I have fixed the double redirects. According to Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions, it's probably best if an admin closes this.
"Game, set and match. Thank you linesmen. Thank you ballboys." --Pdfpdf (talk) 14:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion well done. ÷seresin 17:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.