This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
I have reverted this twice. I do not want to fall afoul of WP:3RR. The presented film is Fascist Italian propaganda and is not a reliable source.Hamish59 (talk) 22:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Hamish, I think you are getting confused about what is a reliable source. The footage has not been used as a source for anything. Where in the article has it been cited or referenced.? It is simply a link to a YouTube clip that is freely available on the internet. Now, if I had quoted the footage and used it as evidence for an argument or point of view within the article, then that would constitute unreliability on the grounds that it was created as war time propaganda and therefore, violates the Wiki rule on biased sources. But even biased sources still have their place as long as the reader is made aware that it is inherently biased. Let's give the readers the benefit of the doubt here, shall we? Most readers are intelligent enough to realize that war time footage by any side, is biased. Besides Hamish, it's in Italian and most English readers wouldn't understand it anyway! It's the exciting visuals that they would be more interested in. You are free to include British and American footage if you like. I watch them regularly. As a reader, I know I would appreciate a link to them.AnnalesSchool (talk) 10:04, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Although the article uses British English, there are several places in which direct quotes of an American historian or the official US name for the theater occur. I have changed these instances (only) from "theatre" to "theater." --Lineagegeek (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Bugger! I left them in. ;O) Some more sections could stand a severe pruning due to repetition and long-windednessKeith-264 (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Can we have the campaignboxes closeable?Keith-264 (talk) 16:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah I can agree about th long windedness, it was various sections of duplicated articles - iirc - bolted together to show a campaign by campaign narrative that was then reorganized into a more chronological flow. Cutting, chopping, adding, and sourcing has been on the to do list!EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I know that feelin'. Apropos the campaignboxes, it's Wiki not us apparently.Keith-264 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)