Talk:British Warm

Not proper noun

While you claim you have RS that indicate British Warm is a proper noun, you don't cite any. In fact, it seem fairly obvious that they are not named after any "Mr. Warm" or anything else that would make it a Warm a proper noun. Furthermore it is not a case there only being one "British Warm" like there is only one "British Crown Jewels". tahc ^chat 19:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

All three of those currently cited use "British Warm", not "British warm". Andy Dingley (talk) 20:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

That just means that they use different capitalization policy than Wikipedia does. Furthermore, they are websites that sell these coats, and are thus not even WP:RSs. tahc ^chat 01:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

If you can find sources to back your WP:POV fine, but right now the sources, including the book source I have added, suggest the normal spelling is capitalized.

Actually from a linguistic perspective, "British warm" would make no sense because it would suggest there is such a thing as a "warm" of which this is just the "British" variant, which is patently not true. No, "British Warm" is the proper name for a specific type of coat. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:49, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster, a RSs if there ever was one, says "British warm."

Please note, what Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) says in its lead... "Do not capitalize the [...] subsequent words in an article title, unless the title [...] is a proper name that would always occur capitalized"

No matter what capitalization policy other works have, Wikipedia policy is that it would have to always occur capitalized... and clearly it doesn't, even if it were a proper name. Futhermore, it is not a proper name.

"A proper noun is a noun that in its primary application refers to a unique entity, [...] as distinguished from a common noun, which usually refers to a class of entities [...], or non-unique instances of a specific class [...]." tahc ^chat 17:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment - I wondered why I was getting so many notifications of this until I realised that I'd created the original page as a redirect. Actually, given that Bermicourt pretty much worked up the article from the redirect into a full article, I'd consider his version of the title to reflect the original content creator's intent.

• Pro tahc's argument - it DOES appear uncapitalised in many specialist books, both military and fashion/clothing related, such as [1], [2], [3], [4].
• HOWEVER! Where I see "British Warm", with the exception of this, it tends not to appear in specialist books or from people who would be expected to know. For example, there is "Warm" from an art historian talking about a Churchill statue here, and several hits from novels (not RS). BUT it is an important note that the Imperial War Museum collections say "British Warm" throughout their database. It's worth noting that on this 1916 poster, we see "British Warm" capitalised. Seeing that the Imperial War Museum favours capitalisation is quite compelling in itself.
• Conclusion - While this could go both ways, the majority of sources do favour "British warm" but some pretty strong sources do indicate a preference for "British Warm." Personally, I lean towards favouring calling it a "British Warm" as it's clearly a proper name, but I can see the arguments for both ways. Mabalu (talk) 18:10, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Even if we agree sources go both ways-- WP:Naming conventions (capitalization) says not to capitalize the subsequent words unless they always occur capitalized. tahc ^chat 02:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

That is a very literal reading of the convention which is really about proper names. British Warm is a proper name; the proper name of a coat. There is no such thing as a "warm". And please do not revert the original words again or removed referenced material unless you have a clear consensus to do so, otherwise you are contravening WP:EDITWAR. I've now included both spelling variants in the lede, so I suggest we leave this and get on with more important contributions to the sum of human knowledge. --Bermicourt (talk) 14:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Warm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150210225947/http://www.h-huntsman.com/blog/introducing-the-british-warm-overcoat to http://www.h-huntsman.com/blog/introducing-the-british-warm-overcoat

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:01, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

British Warm

In the Wikipedia article it is stated that the 'British Warm' is based on the coats from the first World War. Rudyard Kipling, however, writes of the "Baritish Warrum" (his attempt at showing how the words were pronounced by an Indian servant of an English child's family) in at least one of his stories set in India well before the First World War. 78.148.235.192 (talk) 07:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)