Talk:List of surviving veterans of World War I/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Bill Stone

Bill stone the last english veteran of the First World War? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.29.220.241 (talk) 18:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You should be able to do a little research yourself to figure out. Come on!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.114.40.32 (talk) 12:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

So have you got a chrystal ball? Extremely sexy (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No But i mean if stone bill can become the last british veteran? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.141.150.21 (talk) 20:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not then? Extremely sexy (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Since there are still five other English veterans besides Bill Stone that are still living, it is still possible that another English World War I veteran could be the last, don't you think?70.146.62.29 (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

If you count the Australians and the Canadian. Extremely sexy (talk) 18:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No, if you just count the British. - fchd (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Then we have just three (or maybe four), my dear friend. Extremely sexy (talk) 18:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Allingham, Choules, Lucas, Patch, Powers, Stone = 6 British, regardless of where they live now. And please don't refer to me as a "dear friend", you've never even met me. - fchd (talk) 19:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not only that those three don't live anymore over there, but they aren't British anymore either (another nationality), man. Extremely sexy (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I think this 'discussion' should be shut down. Let's represent these brave veterans a little better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snowdog81 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

i agree, its a pointless discussion which noone can answer the question askedWebbmyster (talk) 21:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. This page is for discussion about how to improve the article not idle speculation. Irrelevant questions and comments should really be removed asap. DerbyCountyinNZ (talk) 00:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I also agree, and about a year ago I said the last one could be any of the remaining ones. After you reach these great ages you can't know for sure. After I said that, someone blasted me, and said no Borroni is all but gone....... Well he is now the last one to represent Italy, and I certainly hope he makes it to 110. Lets not forget these are real people though, and not a contest. I wouldn't want one to live in sickness and pain just for a record. (PershinBoy)209.247.21.167 (talk) 08:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course I agree too, but I just answered someone's (asked by another anonymous person) question, allbeit pointless or not. Extremely sexy (talk) 12:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Bill Stone had a fall on Sunday and is now in hospital, although they say he is improving. Hopefully he will make a full recovery and celebrate his 108th birthday in 11 days' time. http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=31073 and http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/latest/3658957.Veteran_responding_to_treatment/ SiameseTurtle (talk) 23:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

A factual error in the first article of course - there are 2 Navy veterans remaining. My fingers are crossed for him. 195.171.111.194 (talk) 12:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Good news; he has now been released from hospital http://www.getwokingham.co.uk/news/s/2035698_veteran_bill_leaves_hospital SiameseTurtle (talk) 10:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

John Babcock 108

Happy birthday. 89.242.218.62 (talk) 18:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

From the information I have been able to gather about him, and the remaining veterans (don't know about the french vet.) Mr. Babcock seems to be in the best total all around condition. He still goes for a walk daily and reads and his mind is good. Just thought I'd update you, but as I've stated times before, at these great ages you can be fine one day and gone the next. Anyway, glad Mr. Babcock is doing well. HAPPY 108!!! (PershinBoy)209.247.21.167 (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

He was removed from the table earlier without a reference. However I found a news article from just 16 hours ago about him, so it looks as if he is still alive: http://www.thewhig.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1190707 —Preceding unsigned comment added by SiameseTurtle (talk • contribs) 02:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The user that removed him appears to be an occasional but persistent vandal so I wouldn't expect there to be any real reason for his removal! Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ (talk) 03:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

One More Turkish WWI vet?

On the home page of this article are a series of references; the sixth of which is a link to a Turkish newspaper article "New Zaman" I believe. It tells of the passing of Yakup Satar this April and mentions that there was at that time one more veteran of the Turkish War of Independence still alive; Colonel Mustafa Sekip Birgol. It said that he was 110 years old, making him old enough to have been in WWI (It also takes years to attain the rank of Colonel). Has his case been investigated further to see if he belongs on these lists?JeepAssembler (talk) 19:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 19:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Mustafa Sekip Birgol was born in 1903 and is "only" 105 years old. He is the last (currently known) living veteran of the Turkish War of Independence, but seems to be too young for WWI.

See the following link with photo: http://www.alaturkaonline.com/yazi.asp?1745/ataturkun-son-askeri- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.61.80.228 (talk) 17:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you; it is probably a case of confusing Muslim years (354 days) with Christian ones; There was similar confusion about Yakup Satar's age. Could Col. Birgol at least be a WWI era vet though? (if he started fighting in 1919).JeepAssembler (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I actually hadn't considered that before. On the deaths pages we have Estonian War vets who could possibly have started in 1920, although it's unlikely. But Veysel Turan and Shlema Livshits also served in spin off wars, but I don't know if they're proved to have served in 1919. It could have easily been the twenties. If Birgol did start in 1919 then he should be on. If we don't know when he started then I don't know if we should give him the benefit of the doubt. It is more important now there are so few.

I didn't look into this for a while, because I can't make head nor tail of languages which aren't European. But I actually found an English messageboard straight away, and he signed up in August 1922 apparently. So no place for him in era-vets, but a worthy suggestion. 78.145.35.67 (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Munitions etc

On a different topic, Eunice Bowman, a British woman who just turned 110, apparently worked in a munitions factory during the war. Could she be a veteran? 78.145.35.67 (talk) 23:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

i wouldn't call her a veteran, both my grandads were dispatch riders for the scouts in world war two but i doubt if, when the number of world war two veterans starts to get low, they'll start calling themselves veterans of the war! But i do think there must be a way of mentioning people such as Eunice Bowman. Webbmyster (talk) 00:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

So this man wouldn't count either?

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Health/Douglas-Terrey-From-Southampton-Aged-105-Eats-Fry-Up-Breakfast-Every-Day/Article/200806415015785?lpos=Health_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_15015785_Douglas_Terrey_From_Southampton%2C_Aged_105%2C_Eats_Fry-Up_Breakfast_Every_Day 78.144.60.104 (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Munitions workers were certainly an integral part of the war effort, but they are not veterans as they did not serve in the military. In fact, my granddad used his status as a munitions worker to avoid the world war II draft. Czolgolz (talk) 02:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

After the death of Gladys Powers I'm missing the 'what if the last one is a woman?' debate. So here's another attempt to reignite it. An article about Scotland's oldest woman, Alexina Calvert, turning 110, reads, "she trained to be a Morse code operator following a spell at college in Aberdeen and met her husband Nicholas at the post office in Inverness shortly after he returned from service in the First World War. The couple married in 1921." Veteran? 78.145.35.67 (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Possible but unlikely I would have thought. If she worked for the Post Office she will have probably received training in Morse Code in order to be able to send (civilian) telegrams as part of her job.81.129.153.141 (talk) 11:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

Herbert Richter

I have a german DVD-documentary of WW1 called "Der erste Weltkrieg" by Polar films. In it, there is a bonus section that also contains interviews with 5 german veterans (Georg Bredtschneider, Ernst Feldmann, Johann Dragon, Heinrich Kratz and Herbert Richter). They must have been recorded 2002 or before as Bredtschneider and Feldmann died in that year.

I am just curious because I found some entries in the german Wikipedia that refer to a "Herbert Richter" born in 1899 (exactly the same name and birth-year of the last interviewed veteran) with no date of his death (doesn't necessarely mean anything): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Richter and http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botschafter_der_Bundesrepublik_Deutschland . This PDF (a little bit old) also seems to refer to that person: http://www.alpenverein-dresden.de/mitteilungen/a_mitteilungsheft1-2000.pdf .

The Herbert Richter in the interview told that was drafted in 1917 (he volunteered), served only at the western front (except a short training in Bialystok) and was an artillery officer when the war ended.

The person in the wikipedia links was a diplomat. I wonder if he is the interviewed person and is maybe still alive? Of course he could have died unnoticed meanwhile, that's most likely, but you never know... Erich Käster is believed to be the last german veteran, but that's not for sure (there were also 2 new cases for France during the last month or so). Does anybody have some further information? I know that there are some experts for german veterans around here (Statistician for example)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.203.57.70 (talk) 19:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Johann Dragon and Heinrich Kratz are not isted in the 'Died in' pages either. Anyone know anything more about them?81.129.153.141 (talk) 11:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

I have found a short biography about Dr. Ernst Feldmann with two pictures taken from 1941 and 2001/2002 (text is in german): http://forum.panzer-archiv.de/viewtopic.php?p=118576&sid=9905dad115bb54044d83bece8f162c78 . Wasn't able to find anything about Dragon and Kratz, too. 92.203.4.181 (talk) 19:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Richter would supercede Helmuth Fink, Georg Rosenkranz, Franz Kuenstler, Georg Thalhofer, Rudolf Christmann and possibly Wilhelm Remmert, to be Germany's oldest man since Robert Meier died in January last year. So it is unlikely, but I can't shed any light on the three. 78.144.60.104 (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

William Olin

Here is the link to Mr. Olin's obituary. Interesting that no mention is made of any military service.

[1]

Genius In the Lamp (talk) 16:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

My condolences, but it does kind of solve a problem. At least Robley Rex is a vet, it's just the join date that's arguable. And Mikhail Krichevsky could be a true case. He is mentioned on DDD. 78.145.35.67 (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I've sent several letters to Mr. Rex, and as of last year he could write (hand write) a pretty good and long letter. I've tried to read between the lines on what he has said, and I am of the opinion that - no doubt he is a vet., but he signed up as soon as he turned 18, which would be May 1919. (PershinBoy)162.114.40.32 (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Unlike Mr Olin, I think Mr Rex is in full possession of his faculties. The story about being on the train on Armistice Day was probably a romanticised account he invented to tease his fans. 195.171.111.194 (talk) 12:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Note: the 1910 census suggests that Robley Rex was born in "1903"...he may have been underage (or the census could be in error). Either way, it seems he was a veteran in 1919, although he told me himself (I called a few years ago, in 2006 I think) that he joined in "1918"...so that's his story.Ryoung122 09:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, as I've mentioned, I've tried to read in between the lines, in letters he sent. One of the letters he sent me dealt with people that would have only been known in my small hometown, and he stated that he had drill training with them. The person of interest Rex mentions is Cecil Hayes, and stated he had drill practice with him. Hayes was a known veteran in our town, but I guess once more this only shows Rex was around, but I imagine, if in anyway possible, the VA believed he enlisted before 11-11-18, they would give him the honor, and Rex would be the first to take it. (PershinBoy)209.247.21.167 (talk) 00:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Bob Taggart

Morning All. Dennis Goodwin has got back to me. Basically, since any military service Bob Taggart may have had occurred after WW1 he didn't check it any further (no reason why he would) So we don't have confirmation, dates of service etc. IMHO I feel that as we have no real evidence, other than presumably a chance remark some-one (Bob Taggart, a relative, a carer) made to Dennis Goodwin, and that we have found nothing since. I think his name should be removed from the list. Thoughts anyone? SRwiki (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The question is, is there any news citation that claims that Bob Taggart is a vet around the time of WWI?Ryoung122 08:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Greetings,

Ancestry.com has 23 Robert Taggarts in 1914-1920 medal rolls:

British Army WWI Medal Rolls Index Cards, 1914-1920

Ryoung122 08:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

He's got to go. It was Mr Goodwin's testimony we were relying on, and it seems that the confusion has been cleared up. No articles have been found, and if they had he would still be an 'unverified era vet', and there's no such section. If it turns out that he is an era vet he can be reinstated. 195.171.111.194 (talk) 12:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I agree. Since he's not a WWI vet and very probably not an era vet, he should be removed unless other evidence surfaces in the future.Czolgolz (talk) 13:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Buster Martin

If any people on here are english you would have seen this man on the tele a few times as britains oldest employee and on his wikipedia page it states he joined the british army in 1920, is this too late to be considered as a unverified era-veteran? his age is also disputed as being 95 and not 102! i understand robert young has looked over his case with regards to him being the oldest marathon runner. Buster MartinWebbmyster (talk) 22:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The man is a complete charlatan - a fraud - he has no birth certificates, nothing on paper to back up his ridiclous stories... his story keeps changing depending on who he speaks to.. he's another Jim Lincoln.

He is more likely aged 85. If he's 102, then I am Ulyesees S Grant

Regards, Buster unbeliever —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.216.119 (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

fair enough! but does anyone know of any military records that exist, or not? Webbmyster (talk) 21:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

To answer your original question, the consensus is that 1919 is WWI era and 1920 is not, since the ToV was ratified just after the turn of the year. There were other treaties yet to be signed of course, and some would argue on that basis. But as it stands, he wouldn't qualify even if this story is true. 78.144.60.104 (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Mikhail Krichevsky

The attached article (in Russian) reports on a celebration of Mikhail Krichevsky's 110th birthday. In describing his early years it makes reference to his being "a cadet" after finishing "commercial school." Whilst this doesn't verify Krichevsky's WWI service as such, it is at least another, independent, citation.

http://www.jewish.donetsk.ua/stat.php?topic=news&page=25&id=424

86.153.31.240 (talk) 23:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

I hope "кадет" here means a student of a military school and not a membet of the Constitutional-Democratic party :-))) --81.190.207.65 (talk) 11:42, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a fair point. My understanding is that the Constitutional Democrats were correctly known as "Kadets" (from Konstitutsionno-Demokraticheskaya) which is "перевода" in Russian, rather than "Cadets." However "Cadets" is also used to describe the Constitutional Democrats and there is no way of knowing definitively which meaning is inferred in the article. Maybe less of a citation than I thought.86.153.31.240 (talk) 08:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

IMHO the former meaning is more or less obvious from the context. Besides, being kadet (Constitutional Democrat), Krichevski would have little chances to live so long (in fact, longer than 40 years) :-)))--81.190.207.65 (talk) 13:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Here are two further articles that make reference to Mikhail Krichevsky's involvment in WWI.

In the first, from 2004, you will see that he states that he was mobilised shortly after enrolling at Mining College, completed military training in October 1917 with the rank of Ensign (2nd Lieutenant) and was awaiting a posting to the Front when the Bolshevik Revolution started.

[2]

The second reports that he did not fight (ie see active service) in WWI but was sent to the Austro-Hungarian front to escort prisoners, at which time the Revolution intervened.

http://www.gpu.ua/index.php?&id=213373&eid=567&lang=ru

This makes four separate news stories that record Krichevsky's participation in WWI in a non-combat capacity (albeit that one reference is only passing and from it one assumes that he was a 'cadet' as opposed to a 'kadet'). I'd be interested in everyone's view on possible verification.86.140.103.72 (talk) 00:10, 20 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

I guess all these stories have the same sourse - MK himself. The differences result from the interviewers' interpretations. In my personal opinion (which can not be any proof), MK had no reasons to confabulate. As for verification - at least you need a correspondent in Kiev able to reach the documents (if they still exist, which is by no means certain).--81.190.207.65 (talk) 13:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

That is the problem. Gladys Powers' documentation was destroyed but she was accepted. Do Russian authorites accept Krichevsky? That is 1 of the era-vet criteria, but do we need stonger evidence for full vets? Authorities have been fooled before and he is claiming an advanced, although not unprecedented, age. The story isn't too fantastic to be believed and we've seen cases emerge late. It would be nice to remove the unverified section, and have a last Russian vet. But it could be a lie. 78.144.60.104 (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

The problem is that I've never heard of Russian or Ucrainian authorities keeping official records or lists of WWI veterans. Obviously it was impossible under the Soviet regime, which condemned the so-called "imperialistic" war. It's only now that I've heard of (alas, not seen) some TV documentaries about the "forgotten war" on the Russian TV. That may be followed by a kind of official recognition but how long will it take?--81.190.207.65 (talk) 10:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Greetings, First, isn't this man living in the Ukraine (not Russia?). Second, circumstantial evidences seem to point in this man's favor (of being 111) but little or no mention is made of actual "war service." Persons who falsely claim to be a veteran are often alone, single men with few or no social connections, and from the lower-class (motivating factors are the need for attention and money). This man appears to be Jewish (a group that had better systems of recordkeeping) and socially connected. However, what needs to happen next is someone who can speak the language is needed to investigate this further. Having him on the "unverified" list for now seems a reasonable compromise.Ryoung122 07:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

My view is that Krichevsky probably is a WWI veteran.

He is not making any outlandish claims. He appears only to have had a short, undistinguished military career that was curtailed by the Russian Revolution. Nor has he anything to gain from making any claims. WWI, ending as it did in defeat and revolution, is treated with ambivalence by the countries of the former Soviet Union. Krichevsky was later a Communist Party member, a mining engineer decorated by the State for his services to the coal industry, and could have gained much more publicity by claiming active involvement in the revolution or ensuing Civil War. Instead, he says that he simply returned to college when the revolution started. Moreover, it is difficult to see why the Jewish Krichevsky would falsify a claim to have served the Tsarist regime that sanctioned the pogroms of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The Russian State Military History Archive (RGVIA) in Moscow is the central archive for military records of the Russian Empire, consolidating the pre-revolutionary Russian military archives and other repositories from across the former Soviet Union. It holds documents relating to the activities of highest, central, and local military administration and military agencies of the Russian Empire from the end of the 17th century until March 1918. This may or may not include individual WWI service records.

More in hope than expectation I have emailed the RGVIA, in Russian using an online translation tool, and if I hear anything I’ll let you know.

(As an aside, we have no official verification of Krichevsky's military service but if he were, say, German would there be an issue? All German WWI service records were destroyed in 1945 and no record of surviving veterans of WWI was kept. How was Erich Kastner’s service, or that of any of the other Germans listed on the ‘Died in’ pages, verified?)

86.143.82.37 (talk) 23:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

A small correction. MK didn't "serve the Tsarist regime" (as a Jew, he had no chance to do that), he served in the army of the short-lived democratic Russia, after the February revolution. Theoretically, falsifying this claim might benefit him after the fall of the communism (1991). I don't believe that, though.--89.228.138.76 (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Greetings,

Central depositories of German records may have been destroyed, but often the archives survived in individual towns, units, and even in the personal possessions of the veteran. For example, William Seegers still had some of his personal records of service in his possession.Ryoung122 01:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't there at least be confirmation/refutation of of his claimed age by checking Tsarist/Soviet/Ukrainian census records?JeepAssembler (talk) 00:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 00:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

November 11th 2008

Ceremony with harry patch,bill stone,henry allingham and Netherwood Hughes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.9.64.179 (talk) 21:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Ideally, yes. Ned Hughes has been invited, but it's a long journey for him. Harry Patch is closer but he didn't attend last year for that reason. Bill Stone has had his recent fall and so may not feel fully recovered. So Henry Allingham, despite being the oldest, is the most likely to be there. 78.144.60.104 (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I think William Stone may be there, as the fall (unless he had another one)was last October, and as far as I know he made a good recovery. I doubt if Patch will be there. He stated that the last couple of trips really sap his energy. (PershinBoy)162.114.40.31 (talk) 20:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

He had another fall a week or two ago, along with an infection (I posted a few links on his subsection on this talk page). However he has since been released from hospital and reports say he is doing well. He is back home in time for his 108th birthday, tomorrow. SiameseTurtle (talk) 20:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hate to hear that. Guess he won't be there. Wish him a Happy 108th! (PershinBoy)209.247.22.75 (talk) 05:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Tomoji Tanabe

I know this is probably only a manifestation of my liking the World's Oldest Man to be a WWI Vet; but Tomoji Tanabe celebrated his 113th birthday last Friday. I know that Japan had roughly the same population as the Austro-Hungarian Empire during WWI (52 to 55 million); but only mobilized one tenth as many troops. In fact, Japan's population grew faster than A.H.E's in the decades prior to the war (from 26 mil when Cmdr. Perry's ships steamed into Tokyo harbor in 1853); "Austria" had 36 mil at that time (before losing it's Italian territories in 1859). Probably only about 5% of Japan's military age males served in WWI; so it's very unlikely any were alive after 2006. But consider, Tanabe grew up in a rural area (which is more conducive to military service) and was a surveyor by profession (Oftentimes Armies train people for that). It would be great if it could be verified that he was a vet.JeepAssembler (talk) 00:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 00:50, 23 September 2008 (UT

veteran or not

this is something thats been annoying me for a while, should people who didn't actually play an active part in the war be counted as veterans or say era-veterans? for example my grandad signed up as 16 year old in 1953 just before the end of the korean war and being so young,say he lived to a great age, touch wood, would we then count him as a veteran of the korean war (which he isnt)and like wise with anyone who is joining up at the moment with regards to iraq and afghanistan. Webbmyster (talk) 16:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a valid question. However, please click on archives above. Several have gone into great detail about this. This was talked about in length, and I believe even voted on. Archives should answer most of your questions. (PershinBoy)209.247.22.75 (talk) 06:07, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

And never mind "voted on;" for instance, in the United States, the WWI Victory Medal was awarded to any member of the US military serving between April 6, 1917, and November 11, 1918, whether they were in the thick of combat or chained to a desk in Fort Gopher Crack, Wyoming.  RGTraynor  05:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

well you're saying that we go on the governments say then as they would be who issued the medal, but the "voted on" does play an active part as we've had french and italian veterans who if we went on the governments say, then they wouldn't be veterans! Webbmyster (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Depends on what criteria you use. As it happens, the French and Italian governments both handed out 2.5 million of their victory medals.  RGTraynor  15:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

This site was basically set up to identify anyone in uniform during WWI with an end date of 11-11-1918 (that is my understanding). In the US a vet could have been called up doing basic training, or stamping papers, and was given the same credit as someone in the trenches. This site is not to say - one person is more important than another. Each country has differant guidelines. I have problems considering someone (remaining in the USA) that never saw fighting considered a veteran. However, that is not the point of this article. As one pointed out, who is to say your not a veteran, if you were in uniform and not on the battlefield, but in possible harms way. Buckles was in harms way and considered a veteran, but was not involved in a battle. The word Veteran has been used very loose in the USA, and in my opinion goes over board in other countries stating you have to have served 3 or 6 months. However, the bottom line was to list those in uniform. The way we have it now, you can click on the name of the remaining veteran, an you can decide in your mind what importance he played. Again! Those better versed than I, can lay out the arguement in archives. (PershinBoy)162.114.40.31 (talk) 19:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Bulgaria

Next Monday, September 29th, 2008 will mark the 90th anniversary of Bulgaria's surrender in WWI. That small country (population five million at that time) mobilized 1,200,000 troops in that war. That is proportionally equivalent to the U.K. having mobilized 11 million or the U.S.A. 24 million. That means that any Bulgarian men still alive of that age will very likely be veterans; however, there are no official records (not even from Bulgaria's 2001 national census) what a shame. Bulgaria was one of the least economically developed Soviet bloc nations during the Cold War and there are no verified National longevity records for it. I guess we will just never know who it's last WWI veteran was and when he died.JeepAssembler (talk) 23:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 23:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Here is an article dated March 2006 in which 106 year-old Peter Ivanov Tsanov states that he served in the Bulgarian Army Transport Troops in 1918. He seems to have led an eventful life having met King Boris, emigrated to Argentina for a period before becoming a Communist Party member and president of the local collectivised farm.

"Official statistics" apparently proved him to be the oldest man in North-West Bulgaria in 2006 but it is not known if he is still alive - there is an identical report of his 104th birthday online, but nothing for a 107th or 108th. His claim of WWI military service will be practically impossible to verify officially I should think.

http://www.bgsever.info/br-03_2006/stranici/str-11.htm

86.149.165.220 (talk) 23:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)Bruce

Lucas, Sydney Maurice (Syd)

Happy birthday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.9.64.179 (talk) 09:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed (tracking sept. 2006 to present) the avg. age = 108. It's at 108.67 now. (PershinBoy)162.114.40.32 (talk) 12:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Since june 27th, we have only lost one veteran (Gladys POWERS 8-15) and we have added three more veterans. Hopefully these 12 will make it to 11-11-2008. (PershinBoy)162.114.40.32 (talk) 15:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Boris Efimov

the russian world war two propaganda cartoonist died yesterday and although he didnt serve in world war one he was part of the miltary uprising in october 1917 so does this not mean he could've been considered an era veteran! Webbmyster (talk) 10:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article about him (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Efimov) makes no reference to active duty uniformed military service, but says he was pursuing legal studies in Kiev at the time. So, barring any other evidence to the contrary, he is not an era veteran. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.248.1.159 (talk) 12:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

right well earlier on it did, it mentioned his studies were interupted when he saw service with the red army in the october uprising of 1917, and someone edited it in between me writing my comment and you writing yours! Webbmyster (talk) 15:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article on Efimov is/was the only one of the hundreds about him online, in either English or Russian, that makes/made any reference to any involvment on his part in the October Revolution and is/was quite possibly inaccurate in this respect.

On this basis, I think the weight of evidence is strongly against his being an era veteran.193.82.143.66 (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Bruce

Bit of a friend of a friend type story I'm afraid. But, I was discussing Efimov with the curator of my local art gallery a month or two ago, who has been and checked with an expert on Soviet art (sorry, didn't catch the guys name I'm afraid) The upshot is that the expert was unaware of any military service for Efimov. By no means conclusive I know, but I just thought I would mention it. SRwiki (talk) 18:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Another New Veteran?

In the "Munitions etc" discussion above, Captain Celery posted this link on 105 year-old Douglas Terrey and his liking for a fried breakfast, but said that he didn't think that he would count as a veteran.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Health/Douglas-Terrey-From-Southampton-Aged-105-Eats-Fry-Up-Breakfast-Every-Day/Article/200806415015785?lpos=Health_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_15015785_Douglas_Terrey_From_Southampton%2C_Aged_105%2C_Eats_Fry-Up_Breakfast_Every_Day

Well, this article from 2003 notes that Douglas Terrey passed the army medical on his 14th birthday (June 1917) and enlisted in the Royal Army Ordnance Corps as a dispatch rider (as opposed to Webbymaster's dispatch rider grandfathers who were Boy Scouts).

http://archive.dailyecho.co.uk/2003/6/27/47473.html

Clearly there is a difference between a boy delivering letters in Southampton and a man going over the top on the Western Front but, technically, with 17 months service in the British Army prior to the Armistice Mr Terrey fulfils the criteria for veteran status as set out in the "Veteran or Not" discussion above and the Archive. There are precedents in terms of youth and type of service: Gladys Powers (waitress), William Guilbert (d 2004, 14 year-old apprentice air mechanic), Alice Strike (d 2004, pay clerk), Marie Johnson (d 2004, Washington DC based typist) have all been accorded veteran status on these pages, but I would appreciate your views on whether he should be included as a Surviving Veteran.

I will write to Dennis Goodwin again to see if he is aware of Mr Terrey and if his service qualifies him as a WWI veteran. 86.163.104.72 (talk) 21:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Bruce

as pershin boy said the other day "This site was basically set up to identify anyone in uniform during WWI with an end date of 11-11-1918" so then surely if his servioce is valid then he is a veteran, and even if dennis goodwin says otherwise he should be included on the list somehow as he did play an active part more so then the veterans who were still in basic training. Webbmyster (talk) 10:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I would agree! I think he should be added to "Unverified Veterans". We have two newspaper articles mentioning his WW1 service and one stating when he signed up and that the Army had honoured him during his 100th year. Hopefully further verification will prove his case and we can add him to yet another British veteran, according to the current criteria defining service. Snowdog81 (talk) 19:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The man we have to thank is the oldest one of all, Tomoji Tanabe. I was perusing articles about his 113th birthday, and the Terrey one was used to contrast with his healthy diet. No-one likes to think that it really is the sensible eaters who live the longest. However a big breakfast is apparently OK, as long as you don't carry on like that for the rest of the day.

And thus he's received a fair amount of coverage. I was initially quite excited, but the coincidence of Webbmyster's comment made me more cautious. But Bruce's source makes it a lot clearer. I've added him to Unverified, as we have a consensus of 4, and I don't see how anyone can argue since it's a claim, although no more than that I suppose. 84.13.35.251 (talk) 22:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

We can add Krichevsky, Mikhail Efimovich at the same time as Terrey, Douglas ( Doug), he deserves him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.9.193.166 (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I live in Southampton as it happens - more specifically I grew up in the village of Marchwood so I find it all an outrageous coincedence especially as he must have been under my nose all this time! RichyBoy (talk) 20:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

And by another coincidence, I believe the last comment you made on this talk page, was that there may be another British veteran. Your absence made me think you might have 'known too much'. But I assume you were refering to Ned Hughes? If Dennis Goodwin validates Mr Terrey as quickly then he will also have a chance to go to the cenotaph on Armistice Day. And he's a lot closer geographically so perhaps it will not take as long.

Consider that Mr Goodwin lives just down the road from Henry Allingham and they've just brought out a book. As for Mr Hughes, he was apparently stationed in Colwyn Bay, and John Babcock at Kinmel Camp, which are both in my area. There's also a 104 year old veteran living in my home town, albeit from World War II. It's a small world. 84.13.25.6 (talk) 22:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Yes I've been away for a long time as my interest in Wikipedia had waned somewhat but basically I was passed on some information from RYoung at the time and it was all on this page within a matter of days, I could have left a quick note clearing it all up though I suppose. RichyBoy (talk) 21:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Well I think I may have been watching too much X Files. Anyway, whether for good or just for now, welcome back. Should have known Robert would be the first to the big scoop. However the archives seem to have disappeared. Can anyone fix that? 84.13.25.6 (talk) 22:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I've fixed it - it seems that somebody has renamed the master page and couldn't be bothered with moving all of the children as well. Very annoying as it was probably a wiki editor that did this to start with. RichyBoy (talk) 01:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Israel?

I was thinking that Israel might be a good place to search for World War I veterans considering it's relatively high standard of living (at least for it's Jewish inhabitants). It was part of the Ottoman Empire at the start of WWI (at that time 90% Arabic and 10% Jewish in demographic composition); although I don't know what the Ottoman Empire's conscription policy towards non-Turks was at that time. During the first U.S.A.- Iraq War (1991) I heard a television commentator remark that Iraq had 250,000 Jews in the early 1940's (no doubt other parts of the middle east that had been under Ottoman jurisdiction also had substantial numbers). Consider also that several hundred thousand Jews emigrated from territories in europe that had been parts of the Russian, German, and Austro-Hungarian Empires. I would think that at least some of these european and middle eastern Jews would have been WWI veterans. Finally, I seem to recall reading that a man with a German sounding last name born in 1896 died in Israel in 2004 (of course that does not mean that he was a WWI vet though).JeepAssembler (talk) 20:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 20:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Lists of known World War I veterans' deaths by year

Does anyone know how to fix this template? Added Arthur Mortimer to 2000 but the total doesn't want to update on the template after editing. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.30.109 (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe it is a template looking at it so your best bet is to manually update this. RichyBoy (talk) 02:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Delfino Borroni

he is died. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.10.253.13 (talk) 18:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Last Alpine Front veteran. 80.249.48.109 (talk) 15:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Saw action or not?

I think the table(s) could do with another column indicating whether they saw action or not. We don't have many left who saw action any more and I think it may be sensible to highlight those who had actually gone abroad to fight, rather than still being in training. Alternatively, this information could be added to the notes section for all of the candidates. SiameseTurtle (talk) 20:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. It's in their biographies, and 'saw action' can be hard to define. Do we count those who were in the theater? Those who were actually shot at? Those who were not shot at but were in areas where they could have been? I say stick with their bios, I think there's only two combat veterans left now anyway.Czolgolz (talk) 20:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

But really, it's quite simple. Those who actually served in the armed forces abroad (not those still in training), would be those who saw action. Looking at their bios isn't a decent way to represent all the candidates. I don't want to have to click on a half a dozen links to find out if they saw action or not, simply because it isn't given on the page. Likely the last veteran of WWI will be someone who was still in training, which is why I think it's important to make the distinction. While they had been recruited into the armed forces, they did not see the war itself. They would have seen the same amount of it as anyone back at home, and probably even less than someone who worked for the Ministry of Defence. If it's in their biographies, why shouldn't it be included on this page? SiameseTurtle (talk) 22:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

You didn't answer Czolgolz's question: how do you define "saw action" and how do you prove it for every candidate? Heck, you can't even get the governments to agree ... France won't credit Fernand Goux, a man who saw fire on the front, to be a WWI veteran, never mind a combat veteran, because of their wacky three-month rule.  RGTraynor  13:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure I did. Those who went abroad to fight or who actively served were those who saw action. France doesn't recognise Goux because he didn't serve for more than 90 days. But the point being that he saw action whether the French government calls him a veteran or not. SiameseTurtle (talk) 18:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

So you don't believe that you actually needed to be in combat to have seen action?  RGTraynor  19:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, there are two seamen left. How do you distinguish that Choules did "see action" and Stone didn't? Both "served abroad", i.e. on the sea:) --89.228.138.76 (talk) 11:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Stone was still in training by the time WWI ended. His first active service was in 1919. Choules on the other hand was already in active service by the end of the war. I think perhaps you may be misinterpreting the phrase "saw action". I'm not trying to say that Choules was actually shot at. Those sorts of records don't exist. However some UK service records do exist for WWI (those not destroyed in the fire) SiameseTurtle (talk) 18:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

How about this: We could rate the veterans based on their level of service. "Saw Combat" would mean that the veteran participated in a battle. "Deployed" would mean that they weren't in any battles, but were in a front-line position. "Reserve" would mean just that; they were in a reserve unit that was never deployed. "Home Front" would signify someone who served in a supporting capacity, like the dispatch-rider guy. "In training" would signify that the veteran was not posted to a unit before Armistice Day. Does this sound like it would be a useful classification system? 70.88.102.62 (talk) 16:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

No. Do we really need five categories to classify 11 guys?Czolgolz (talk) 16:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

We could debate this forever in a day but the image most of the general populace have in their minds of WWI is a soldier up to his knees in mud with a tin helmet on his head in a trench with no mans land over his shoulder. Not wishing to take away the contributions of anyone who signed up or has even served in some capacity the last veteran/soldier of WWI to many people is now Harry Patch, and I suspect that when his long life does come to an end the British press and quite likely the European press will revere him in that way as well. I don't have a problem with him symbolising the last veteran/soldier even though there is likely to be a handful of other veterans still living, because if you were to take a set of 'core values' as to what a veteran of WWI should be like he would be the only person that would qualify (for instance he was a soldier, served in the trenches, was part of a major battle at Ypres, got his war medals). I don't want anyone to get excited and start saying and what about Allingham and Goux, I'm just saying that realistically Harry Patch is the last 'true' embodiment of a WWI soldier, and I would certainly be happier for the last link to WWI to be remembered as Harry Patch rather than someone in training. Besides, we will all know who the last 30 or so veterans are anyway as it is our interest. RichyBoy (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Richyboys comments makes most sense. no one who wasn't there thinks of world war one and thinks of the training, and unless we have a naval background i imagine most people dont think of the navy even though it was just as much a part as the trenches! if there were to be a 'perfect' last veteran left alive to sum up the war then unfortunately we don't have it but it would be a cross between patch and choules. Patch being the man who fought in the trenches and lost his friends and choules being the eager to fight, underaged boy, i believe this is what we all see when we think of the world war one. although none of this realy matters as we only have a possible 13 men left. if we were still in 1999 then maybe the different distinctions of combat would make sense. Webbmyster (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it makes more sense to add it now than ever. We're coming to a point where there are very few veterans left who saw action. Most of the younger veterans were still in training. Any memories they have of the war are likely equivalent to those of anyone who stayed at home. Back in 1999, the majority of veterans probably saw service, so the distinction wouldn't have been entirely necessary. The most likely outcome is that the last 'veteran' was someone still in training, and while that is still highly commendable, I feel the distinction needs to be made. For the record, I would count active service in the Navy, or indeed for any military service. SiameseTurtle (talk) 18:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

i agree that naval service is service because that was there job, but what about douglas terrey? his job was to deliver dispatches so did he serve or not? there were men who did EXACTLY the same job but in france, so how would we distinguish between the two? Webbmyster (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

If his story is true then he has to count. As Bruce said at the start of the month, similar cases have been included in the past, so why not now? It's taken longer than the Ned Hughes case but I'm still hopeful. It's not British centric. There may be handful of French cases remaining but it's not our home country or our first language. As noted below, we can only hope than Monsieurs Mathieu and Toussaint let us in on their information. 80.249.48.109 (talk) 18:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I think we're opening ourselves up to a whole debate over what constituted 'saw action' 90 years ago. It is already mentioned on the main page which of those vets were still in training and which saw combat. Their biographies all go into greater details. I don't think the table needs to be changed.Czolgolz (talk) 19:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I think most of us are smart enough to make a decision on reviewing their bios. There will always be one group of people that consider a veteran to be this, or that, and someone in training to be something else. I agree, at this time, I wouldn't bother with updating this site, but on the bios page yes. As mentioned before, this site will probably shut down, or change once we get down to the last 3 or 4 members (PershingBoy)63.3.10.2 (talk) 22:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

In my mind I consider that there are 5 left that went beyond training. Fernand Goux and the 4 listed on the following french site http://dersdesders.free.fr/combattant.html. (PershingBoy)63.3.10.2 (talk) 23:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

A Macedonian source (!) on Borroni takes this view. Obviously this is pending the French situation. It's a shame for the others but we're doing our bit here. 80.249.48.115 (talk) 17:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Combat Deaths on Nov 11, 1918 (and beyond)

Greetings,

This article notes (ironically) 11,000 casualties on Nov 11, 1918. While the Armistice happened then, reading some of the comments it is apparent that deaths continued after the "official" end of the fighting.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7696021.stm

Just a small sample:

My father was the doctor serving with the 2nd Kings African Rifles in the bush on the Mozambique border on 11/11/18. It took three days for the armistice message to get through (via the Germans) and there were several serious skirmishes in the meanwhile killing a British officer and several askaris. Antony Murphy, Birmingham

Many also fell after the armistice, news of this agreement to cease hostilities took time to reach to the frontline in the far reaches. My great grandfather was killed in Palestine after the 11/11/1918 armistice. I'm sure he was not alone, sad but true. Matthew, Swindon

Matthew, my grandfather was a Lewis gunner in the Machine Gun Corps; initially on the Western Front but then in Palestine. I recall him telling me, during my childhood, that he fought on for several days after 11/11/18 and that British soldiers were killed beyond Armistice Day.

This is one reason why I think if someone served after Nov 1918 but before the 1919 Treaty of Paris, they should be mentioned (at least footnoted).Ryoung122 09:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

The German Fleet wasn't scuttled at Scapa Flow until something like June 1919, a month before the treaty. That's clearly active war service if you were in the British navy keeping an eye on things. ToV is a very good cut-off IMO, all things considered RichyBoy (talk) 17:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

More French veterans?

90 days of combat service ............... or dead or wounded during his military service !

2 is not the real number !

Laurent TOUSSAINT Ingénieur d'étude

Greetings,

Today Laurent Toussaint strongly implied that he had more French WWI cases after I said there were only "2" left (remember he is responsible for quite a number, such as Rene Riffaud, Francois Jaffre, Raymond Guay, Bernard Delaire, etc).

Note that Frederic Mathieu has confirmed that Fernand Goux and "Francois" Picault were veterans, and that he has "seen" the documents.

Ryoung122 02:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Are the "2" Goux and Picault? 80.249.48.115 (talk) 17:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I wonder if we have enough info. on either French veteran to enter a biograph of them? (PershinBoy)162.114.40.32 (talk) 15:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

There was previously a Goux article, but it was deleted due to the "one in, all in" approach of the deletion squad who know nothing about the article. 80.249.48.115 (talk) 17:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I think there were more French Veterans who died in recent years than are listed on the "Died In" pages. For example, according to the lists the total number living in France declined from 24 to 16 (including the recently discovered cases) in the year 2005; a decline of only 33%. Someone deployed to the front on Aug. 12th, 1918, then gassed, and had a limb shot off would not be counted by the French government. Although it is true that once a sample size gets below 30 the variance from normal rates of decay increases.JeepAssembler (talk) 21:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 21:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe that is correct, they had an exception for combat-wounded veterans. But for Goux, eight days at the front still carried the risk of being shot...as mentioned in the BBC recently, there were 11,000 casualties on Nov 11, 1918.Ryoung122 02:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Verification of survivors

The anniversary is approaching. It will be extremely important to have the most accurate list of the surviving veterans by November, 11. Therefore I've got the following question: is anyone tracing the veterans who are not in the centre of public attention (especially those living in Australia)? Are tou sure all three are still alive?--89.228.138.76 (talk) 20:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

if they had died im sure there would have been at least one article printed. choules and lucas are always counted by the british press as veterans so they would have mentioned something. Webbmyster (talk) 13:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

There was an article for the birthday of Sydney lucas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.37.233.110 (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen one, but he was confirmed alive as of 19 September (2 days before his birthday). I am able to contact a family member of Choules if necessary, but I don't see the need as there have been no reports of his death. SiameseTurtle (talk) 19:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

and for John Ross? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.37.233.110 (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC) He was still alive as of April this year, and there have been no reports of his death. Media coverage of these veterans is very good, unlike for the newly discovered veterans (such as Goux and Hughes). They have been known about for some time and so the media are fully aware of them. SiameseTurtle (talk) 21:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Well we found out very quickly about Lucas' death. Ross may not be revered as Australia's last vet, but he is their oldest man, so it won't go unnoticed. 212.183.134.66 (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

2008 UK remembrance information

The following link has information on one of the BBC's programmes for the 90th year of remebrance

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk46/tue.shtml

Tuesday 11 November 10.00-11.15am BBC ONE www.bbc.co.uk/remembrance

Of more than five million British men and women who served in the Great War, only three are still alive: Henry Allingham, Harry Patch and Bill Stone.

Broadcast live from the Cenotaph, the last three voices of a generation gather to remember friends and relatives who died in the most bitter and devastating fighting the world had ever seen.

In addition the following is the regular remembrance programme. I don't know if the above will be in attendance, they could be as they are going to be there two days later, but equally they may not be part of the parade.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk46/sun.shtml

1918-2008 – NINETY YEARS OF REMEMBRANCE The Ceremony Of Remembrance Sunday 9 November 10.30am-12.10pm BBC ONE www.bbc.co.uk/remembrance

RichyBoy (talk) 13:45, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Frank Buckles

A ceremony with Frank Buckles for the 90th year of armistice?

Simple curiosity ,Frank Buckles is Republican(Mc cain) or Democrat (Obama)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.37.233.110 (talk) 22:20, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Frank Buckles is a Democrat and supported Obama. John Babcock, despite being a Republican, voted Obama, due to his opposition to the Iraq War. 212.183.134.209 (talk) 23:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

As "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of surviving veterans of World War I article.", exactly how do these comments help? DerbyCountyinNZ (talk) 23:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

On a related note, John Ross supports Australia's Labour Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. 212.183.134.66 (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Lucas Dead/Cenotaph/Other vets

Syd Lucas is dead. The telegraph obituary mentions that Allingham, Patch & Stone will be at the Cenotaph.

No mention is made of Hughes, only 4 vets are mentioned & Goodwin is quoted directly.

Thank you

The above comment was left by someone else. Here is the link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3385719/British-First-World-War-Veteran-dies-days-before-90th-anniversary.html

212.183.134.66 (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Comment: they did not quote Goodwin directly about how many veterans were left. Also, we have known about Lucas for years, yet the article claims he only came to public attention "recently." This is not accurate...it would be best to ask Goodwin himself what he thinks of Netherwood Hughes.Ryoung122 02:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Although I appreciate the promptness of the anonymous user, I wanted to distance myself from the comment on Ned Hughes. It sounds like the case is in question. Well I only have the word of Bruce on this, but he is one of the most constructive contributors to this article, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I would love for Mr Hughes to be at the cenotaph on Tuesday, confusing the press. But it's a lot further for him than the others. And Allingham and Stone are military men; Patch has attained almost mythical status. Although Mr Hughes does not seem the publicity-shy type, perhaps for this reason he still doesn't feel like a 'proper' veteran. 212.183.136.193 (talk) 03:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

I have a letter from Dennis Goodwin confirming Ned Hughes' status as a veteran which I copied verbatim to everyone in a previous posting (now in the archive). Alas, I'm too technically incompetent to know how to upload an electronic version of it for general inspection, but am happy to if someone can provide a brief explanation of how to do so.193.82.143.66 (talk) 17:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Bruce

Here is a suggestion: take a photo of the document with a digital camera and e-mail it to someone like me:

robertdouglasyoung@yahoo.com.

Ryoung122 08:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well everyone has their speciality. Your letter writing and internet searching has paid dividends for Mr Hughes. Even I can do the latter, but the Lucas obit writers obviously can't. The French I can understand, but they don't even seem to know of Babcock and Buckles, despite having about a billion articles between them. That doesn't mean they're not vets and it doesn't for Ned Hughes either. I wonder if Mr Lucas' death would have been so widely reported any other month. He really picked his moment. Then again Will Young may have received similar coverage but it was so long ago. 212.183.134.129 (talk) 19:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

For obvious reasons, the British media tend to concentrate on British veterans and so do often miss Babcock and Buckles. However that's not to say they aren't aware of the latter two. In fact they are aware of them. It also depends on which paper/news the article is from and how up-to-date their information is. I wouldn't be surprised if articles next week have not picked up on Lucas's death. I guess it mostly depends on whether the person they have in charge of gathering the information has kept up to date with developments or not. SiameseTurtle (talk) 19:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Photo

There are photos of 10 veterans during the first world war? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.37.109.105 (talk) 10:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.10.2 (talk) 21:27, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

do you mean, are there photos of the last 10 veterans? theres that website that had them on but i can't remember the address im afraid! Webbmyster (talk) 23:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Genarians has the 7 that are available elsewhere. Hughes' reference has a photo. None for Goux and Picault that I know of. 212.183.134.66 (talk) 23:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

No, not in 2008 but during the first world war,please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.37.109.105 (talk) 16:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Other than Allingham and Buckles' which are on their articles, I saw the young Patch and Stone on British news today. Whether they are available online I don't know. 212.183.136.193 (talk) 22:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

To see recent pictures of 7 veterans go to this site - http://www.genarians.com/WWI%20Veterans.html I'm not sure why the other three veterans are not uploaded. The two french vets may request privacy. As for Hughes, I am clueless. (PershingBoy)63.3.10.1 (talk) 21:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

There was previously a French flag to represent Goux. But I suspect the supposed controversy over Picault meant that he and Hughes were never added, and Goux was removed. Yet again our attempts at accuracy are thwarted by people who don't have a clue. 212.183.134.209 (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Maybe the media is just slow (or perhaps cautious), but it seems like they have settled on the 7 veterans, and are not interested in acknowledging additional ones. (PershingBoy)63.3.10.2 (talk) 23:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Cenotaph 2008

After watching the ceremony today I hope they are not pestered into going to another one in the future - it is clearly such a physical ordeal for all 3 of them now, they should just attend their local event instead. Harry Patch was due to read an act of remembrance but didn't do so in the end - perhaps he felt he wasn't up to it, even though he was dressed for standing up as he was in trousers and had no blanket covering him. Full marks to them for attending but it was very sad watching the human toll of age that weighs heavily upon them now. RichyBoy (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It was a bit ghoulish really. I think it was just because it was the 90th anniversary and they'll all be gone by the 100th. Of course we don't know that they were pestered, but Mr Patch didn't go last year. He looked good though, sitting very upright. Mr Stone has clearly recovered well. He was singing his heart out. Mr Allingham looked the worst really. I think he wanted to stand with his wreath, but again, wasn't up to it. He held his legs up when they were moving though. Their frailty just shows how incredible Tomoji Tanabe is. I was very irritated by the ignorance of Ned Hughes though. They all talk like experts but can't be bothered to do any research. 212.183.134.130 (talk) 15:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

i certainly don't think henry allingham or bill stone were pestered as they both see it as there duty, and harry patch wouldn't have gone if he didn't want to! One report on the BBC called them the last british veterans anywhere in the world and also that noone knew if there were any other veterans around the world. it doesnt take a genius to type surviving veterans of the first world war into google and this site comes up so its obvious they put NO effort in what so ever. there was also an artical with denis goodwin in the daily mirror and it said he is not aware of any other veterans so i dont know when he was asked but what about ned hughes? Webbmyster (talk) 19:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Fantastically, Ned Hughes is mentioned by CNN. They're not entirely sure of themselves, because they say 4 veterans and that he was in training. They obviously don't realise that Bill Stone was too. Still good though. As for his lack of coverage, maybe he felt like an 'outsider', geographically or otherwise, and that's why Mr Goodwin hasn't mentioned him in recent interviews. It is strange though. Hopefully he will be more widely recognized now that the anniversary has passed. 212.183.134.130 (talk) 19:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Could anyone tell me if there is a website that shows pictures of this 2008 ceremony? (PershingBoy)63.3.10.1 (talk) 21:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

BBC amongst others. 212.183.134.209 (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Not to be overtly critical but if anyone had watched and observed closely they made it clear that they were the last 3 of four British veterans, and in addition many news sites explained that Mr Choules was attending local events and that Syd Lucs had only recently passed away, and that Henry Allingham was Europes oldest man. I can't but help feel that this info is cited from this website, with additional confirmation from people like Mr Goodwin. It is about as one can expect from the media. I would like to see more wide-spread coverage of the 10 veterans left, but that isn't up to me sadly. The info used in the programmes probably came before Nedrwood Hughes was verified. Nevertheless, I won't change my views - it was wonderful that these old boys went to the Cenotapth and it is going to mean something for years to come as more and more of the youth of the UK are made to realise they are feckless yobs on the back of these peoples sacrifices - but I for one would just like to thank them and wish them the very best - the eyes of the world where upon them and I hope it doesn't cost them their lives within the next couple of weeks - we will all know the excertion that caused it if it happens. RichyBoy (talk) 01:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

In terms of info cited from here, I've seen sentences of mine reproduced in entirety on some major sites. What I want to know is when am I going to get my royalties cheque?! The last sentiment I obviously agree with. I don't suppose you're talking about Mr Stone, because despite his recent fall, he looked fine, wrapped up warm. With Allingham and Patch I'm telling myself that they have a lot of engagements. Because this is one of few we've seen, we think that they look so frail. But I'd like to think that if they really weren't up to it, someone would have intervened.

The Choules coverage has been very good. He was on Midlands Today. At first he was difficult to understand, and his daughter seemed to be speaking very slowly to him. I thought he might not be right, mentally. But it soon became obvious that, like the others, he's simply softly spoken and hard of hearing. He actually seemed quite bright and physically OK too. Surprisingly he had some of the Midlands accent mixed with Australian, even after 80 years.212.183.134.65 (talk) 02:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Eleven

How coincidental; The First World War effectively ended on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month. A couple of weeks ago someone posted that eleven thousand more miltary casualities occurred after the Armistice among the western european nations (perhaps most happened in the middle east or africa; German General Vottek didn't surrender until Nov. 25th). If Mikhail Krivechy's claim is true then there would be eleven surviving veterans, and he claims to be - what else? One hundred and eleven years old.JeepAssembler (talk) 21:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 21:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Or indeed Doug Terrey (although he's not 111). Thinking about it, Mr Goodwin has taken longer to get back to Bruce on this than for Ned Hughes. But then he was an actual soldier, unlike the despatch rider that Mr Terrey claims to have been. So it may not be such a pressing concern. He took nearly 10 weeks to tell SRwiki that he didn't know anything about Bob Taggart. But at least he did eventually. So it could be December before we have an answer. Even if he's not a veteran worthy of a cenotaph visit, we should still find out whether it's a true case, and therefore a veteran for our purposes. 212.183.134.209 (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

= 'Even if he's not a veteran worthy of a cenotaph visit, we should still find out whether it's a true case, and therefore a veteran for our purposes'

Please. Some decorum. Let's not forget that these are real people, real lives we are discussing. That comment reads and sounds so impersonal, as if these guys were just stats. They are not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.30.132 (talk) 22:18, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

My point (which you chose to ignore) was that Mr Goodwin's association may not accept Mr Terrey as a veteran, but we at Wikipedia will. He wouldn't even be on this page if it wasn't for my research. What have you contributed lately? Oh that's right. Nothing. Just a sanctimonious comment. We already have plenty of people to do that. You must be very proud. 212.183.134.129 (talk) 01:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

Bill Stone

What is the current status on Bill Stone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.56.240 (talk) 01:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Alive and well - he was at the cenotaph on Tuesday. SiameseTurtle (talk) 10:26, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Ned Hughes & Douglas Terrey

After nearly 3 years of contributing to these pages I've finally got round to getting a Wikipedia log in. The purpose of doing so was to upload the letter received from Dennis Goodwin confirming Ned Hughes' WWI veteran status. However, as it is in the form of an personal letter I am given to believe by Wikipedia's copyright experts that it does not constitute a 'Reliable Source' for Wikipedia's purposes and I believe I would need to seek Mr Goodwin's permission to post it in any case.

You'll have to trust me on this one, therefore (I am responsible for the bulk of the names on the 'Died In' pages), but I see that further research has confirmed his service in the Manchester Regiment anyway.

I still haven't heard from Dennis Goodwin regarding Douglas Terrey and will update you when I do, but the above rules will apply to his letter so you'll have to take whatever news there is on trust too.

Bruce

Brucexyz (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but the fact of his service in the 51st Manchesters came to my attention through a letter posted on the Great War forum, and it's since been removed. It seems that others were making efforts to verify his service, since they weren't aware of your success.

It was mentioned that he had to go to Blackburn at some point, and was later stationed in Colwyn Bay. However the 51st Manchesters were apparently based near Great Yarmouth at that time, so there are some discrepancies to be ironed out. But that's also true of the 'older' cases so I don't think there's anything to read into it.

Regarding Doug Terrey, as I've said before, this is not an unprecedented wait for a response. Mr Goodwin has obviously been busy this week and recently with the book. But I was thinking, since he served in the Home Guard in WWII, would that make him a 'double veteran'? This is already relevant for John Ross. 212.183.136.193 (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

An update on Ned Hughes:

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1088004/Im-forgotten-survivor-World-War-One-says-108-year-old-man.html Ryoung122 10:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3491093/New-First-World-War-veteran-comes-to-light-through-internet.html

And another one that mentions us. Good old broadsheets. 212.183.134.209 (talk) 17:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

That's long been the problem with identifying UK veterans - the only complete record is the medal roll - and to qualify for the British War Medal you needed at least 28 days of mobilised service (or to have been killed on active service before this point). Anything else and your pretty much down to luck on what was not destroyed in the WWII bombing raid. RichyBoy (talk) 12:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Just to clairfy a bit more I didn't mean that the medal roll was a complete record of personnel, I meant that the medal rolls are the only WW1 personnel records that exists in their entirety which weren't destroyed or damaged in some way. RichyBoy (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually I just noted the mention of 'double veteran' by Captain celery. This is were it gets interesting on deciding who is a veteran and who isn't. The 1939-1945 defence medal is a genuine WWII British campaign medal and it was awarded for certain types of civillian service as well as military service, the qualification for military service was more clear cut than WWI, I believe that you just had to be a member of the armed forces during the war. However the qualification for it is complex if you are a civillian; generally speaking you needed to have performed at least 3 years of service, but it could be awarded across a very large range of civillian activities. This was in part to recognise the complete mobilisation of the country, something that Hitler could never do with his political views on the family etc etc not the article for this discussion etc etc. As a matter of note, Harry Patch has a 1939-1945 defence medal, and probably counts as a genuine WWII veteran because of that, but I don't know enough about that kind of thing to say for certain. RichyBoy (talk) 13:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Fernand Goux 1899-2008

Sadly, Mr. Toussaint is reporting the death of French quasi-veteran Fernand Goux of France on Nov. 16th. Having served 8 days at the front (Nov. 3-Nov 11, 1918) and having spent months on "dead body duty," I think it is a travesty that he was not an "official" poilu. 131.96.91.75 (talk) 04:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I totally agree. I wonder if the the French government enacted the "3 months" standard in order to save money by limiting the number of veterans it was expected to take care of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.88.102.62 (talk) 12:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I've never managed to find out through reading or otherwise just why 3 months was in place, personally I think it more likely to be something akin to a 'tour of duty' more than anything else, considering that previous wars were conducted without mechanisation and trenches. It might even be the zeitgeist of the French nation come Novemeber 1918 for all I know. In my books though Mr Goux was a veteran through-and-through having been sent to the front. RichyBoy (talk) 14:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Correction: Mr. Toussaint now says that Mr. Goux died Nov 9 2008 (a different Sunday) rather than Nov 16 2008. That leaves Pierre Picault, although there is apparently another anonymous veteran after Picault. Frederic Mathieu confirmed Picault's service but so far no details on the anonymous veteran.Ryoung122 21:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm from the USA, and it doesn't make sense why someone was not honored with a state funeral, with less than three months service, but still was in the trenches as Fernand Goux. On the other hand some make a big deal about those that were in training for less than a month, and not only did they not see action, they were not even shipped out. In saying this, I understand that this site was not set up to say who quailifies for this or that, but to bring to attention to the last veterans of WWI, though some do not agree on the end date, or meaning of what a veteran status should or should not be. (PershingBoy)63.3.10.129 (talk) 05:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Since you all feel so passionately about it, how about saving his article? 212.183.134.210 (talk) 17:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)Captain celery

John Campbell Ross

Does the government of Australia have any public plans upon the passing of John Ross? It's my understanding that he's not recognized as an actual veteran of the Great War. Be that as it may, his death will bring a personal end to an era important in the history of that particular country. Maybe I'm pontificating for no reason at all and have simply overlooked the answer to my own question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.56.240 (talk) 19:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Well if he keeps at it, he may be honored as the oldest man ever, from Australia! (PershinBoy)162.114.40.32 (talk) 18:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC)