Jump to content

Talk:Elizabeth Cross

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

Picture

[edit]

The BBC News article has a photo of the cross. I'm not sure what the copyright status of the image is, but maybe we can add it to the article? Adam McMaster (talk) 12:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The images appear to be those released by the MOD in the press release which are being marked as being under Crown Copyright, which unfortunately is not suitable for use on Wikipedia, though we might just about get away with a "fair use" at the moment as presuambly none have been issued. Even when they are issued, I assume the design and appearance of the cross itself would themselves be under Crown Copyright, so I'm not quite sure what the status of a photo taken by someone else would be. David Underdown (talk) 13:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think fair use will be fine here. If the image and appearance of the cross itself was copyright then the BBC would not have been allowed to publish a picture of it, nor would anyone else. A google image search produces dozens of pictures of it and nobody has been sued. If somebody who has an EC takes and uploads their own picture of it, that would be better, but in the meantime I'm going to go ahead and use this one. Richard75 (talk) 23:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eligibility

[edit]

This " .... Those who died as a result of an act of terrorism where the available evidence suggests that the Service person, whether on or off duty, was targeted because of his or her membership of the UK Armed Forces. ... " will cause some concern to whose ex-members of the [Ulster Defence Regiment] who were killed by terrorists but were not a 'Service person'. Gavin Lisburn (talk) 21:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this is really suitable for the talk page as it's not directly related to improving the article, but anyway. There's at least one case where an off-duty UDR man was decorated through military channels for taking on an armed man with his personal protection weapon (a non-terrorist incident) see [1], so I think it's fair to say that they are treated as service personnel in some respects, and the various Acts which set up and amended the legal basis for the UDR would probably shed more light on this. I also assume that in due course a Royal Warrant will be published in the London Gazette which will be the actual legal basis for awards, rather than what's been published by the MOD so far, and that may well clear up matters such as this.
UDR man Eric Glass was decorated for offing a provo when he was off-duty, but in relation to ex-members I'd take the question to the the MOD or the UDR Association as we merely report the selection criteria Kernel Saunters (talk) 09:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I think I actually misunderstood the original question, were you talking about people who had left the UDR before being killed? David Underdown (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Gavin Lisburn (talk) 23:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Guardian' quotes Jock Stirrup as saying "There are always very difficult issues around the boundary. Each will be addressed on its merits", which would seemto suggest there'll be some flexibility in making the awards.[2] David Underdown (talk) 10:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Precedence of wearing with deceased's orders and medals

[edit]

Where will the Elizabeth Cross be worn when a relative is wearing the deceaseds medals etc? Gavin Lisburn (talk) 22:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the Elizabeth Cross is awarded to the next of kin, rather than the service person, I'd imagine that it would not be mounted with the other medals. Again this will probbaly cleared up when the actaul Warrant is published. David Underdown (talk) 09:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Royal Warrant was issued, but it does not rule on the precedence of the Cross; it merely states that the Cross may be worn by the deceased's designated next of kin, at that person discretion. So, there is no issue of precedence of the Elizabeth Cross (either in the order of precedence or in the order of wear), vis a vis the deceased's other medals and honours--- given that the person in question is already dead, and that the Cross is awarded not to the deceased as a post mortem medal, but to the deceased's next of kin, albeit in commemoration for the deceased's sacrifice (hence the command to the effect that the names of the deceased are to be inscribed in a Registry of the Elizabeth Cross) and as a mark of recognition of the next of kin's grief. A question could arise, however, concerning the precedence of the Elizabeth Cross in the order of wear vis a vis the designated next of kin's other medals and decorations, should the next of kin also be a bearer of decorations, given that the Royal Warrant authorizes the next of kin who is the recipient of the Cross to wear it. However, instead of laying down precise rules to be followed in that case, the Queen opted to allow the Elizabeth Cross to be worn by the designated next of kin at that person's discretion. In other words, the Royal Warrant establishes no precedence (neither in the order of wear nor in the order of precedence) of the Elizabeth Cross vis a vis the desingated next of kin's other decorations. The designated next of kin may simply wear it at will. Furthermore, the Elizabeth Cross does not confer, either to the next of kin or to the deceased who is commemorated post mortem by it, the right to use postnominal letters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.4.208.67 (talk) 02:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Elizabeth Cross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:15, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Cross. 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:

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) 19:13, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Cross. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How many?

[edit]

Is it known how many awards have been made, even in very approximate figures? PamD 07:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elizabeth_Cross&oldid=1212719874"