Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of field marshals of the British Army

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promoted — MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of field marshals of the British Army

[edit]
Nominator: HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?
Note: previous review is located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of Field Marshals of the British Army (note caps), as the article has been moved in the intervening period.
I'm bringing this list back here for a second attempt, having massively increased the number of references and fixed some sorting issues. As I said last time, this list provides a fascinating snapshot of the British Army through the 300-odd-year history of the rank of Field Marshal—the highest, most prestigious, and most coveted rank in the British Army. The rank has been held by 138 men—most of whom had decades-long careers in the army, some royals were given the rank after just a few years' service, an some were given the rank as a gesture of diplomacy, which makes for an eclectic group of men.

Lists aren't my speciality, but I'm hoping this might make it to FL, so all feedback is welcome! Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • CommentsSupport
I am unsure of what the relationship between this article and Field marshal (United Kingdom). The featured list people want explanations in the lists; but now the list contains more information that the article. Whatever.
Ideally, the article would provide a description and history of the rank; the list is about the 138 men to have held the rank, with enough history and background information to place it in context. That article is pretty crappy, though, and I'm tempted to redirect it to the list, but there could conceivably be a use for an article on the rank and a list of its holders.
  1. I am not certain about the statement that the US reserves General of the Army for wartime. I remember talk about promoting Colin Powell and David Petreus to the rank, and this never came up. Bradley was promoted in peacetime in 1950.
    I've qualified this with "mostly". Our article seems to suggest that it's reserved for wartime commanders (though I don't have the source to hand), and Heathcote says the same.
  2. Having noted the distinguished careers of the military field marshals, it seems only fair to note that a couple made it without seeing a shot fired in anger.
    Fair point. I'll see if I can add something about that.
    How;s this?
    Disappointed. I thought you would go down the list looking for them like you want your readers to do. The first, who was famous when I was an ankle biter, was Charles Moore, 1st Marquess of Drogheda, who was not only the oldest man to receive a baton, at age 91, but managed to do so without seeing combat. (Although the two may be related.) This stood as the record until 1985, when Sir John Wilfred Stanier was promoted without seeing any action. Then in 1992, Richard Vincent, Baron Vincent of Coleshill was similarly honoured. The oldest living British field marshal (and the only one I've ever met) is Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, who (all going well) turns 91 in June. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It's interesting, certainly, but I'm not sure how relevant the amount of combat an officer saw in the course of his career is to his promotion to field marshal. It's worth a passing mention in the prose, which is what I've given it, but I don't think it's sufficiently relevant to an officer's appearance on this list that it should be noted on individual list entries. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That's because you know what you're talking about; but the reader may not. I'm not sure how relevant the amount of combat an officer saw in the course of his career is to his promotion to field marshal is the important point. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I respectfully disagree. The amount of combat an officer saw would be relevant to his biography, but it would only be relevant to this list (in my opinion) if it was directly relevant to the officer's eligibility to be on this list. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. though four others became cabinet ministers Seems a bit of a tease. Why not mention them? (Same goes for the two distinguished foreign military officers and one foreign statesman)
    It's almost an intentional tease—we want the reader to look at the list, not just the prose, and I think (with the possible exception of the cabinet ministers), to name them would cross over from summarising to duplicating the list.
  4. No professional officer has reached the rank of field marshal without having served in the cavalry, infantry, Royal Armoured Corps, Royal Artillery or Royal Engineers. Tom Blamey did. You need a little more qualification.
    Done.
  5. I am not sure how money was saved by cutting back on field marshals. Do they get additional benefits over four-star officers? I note as an aside that in 2011 the British Army had 255 generals, compared with the US Army's 301. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:17, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    They hold the rank (and continue to receive a salary) for life, whereas a four-star officer would retire once they relinquish the last position of their career, and one assumes their salary would be higher than a general's, but I can't imagine it would save a huge amount of money. It's interesting, isn't it, but that and the comparison to the US Army was the rationale the MoD gave for suspending the rank.
  • Support My only outstanding comment from the last review (the lack of an individual reference for each field marshal) has now been addressed. I agree with Hawkeye's comments above, but am confident that they'll be quickly addressed. The only suggestion I'd make is that you may wish to note that Sir Henry Wilson, 1st Baronet is the only FM to have been killed in action (at least according to the blurb for this biography I read on my Kindle!). Nick-D (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose per standard disclaimer, but I didn't look at the tables. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 03:25, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much, Dan. I looked at your edits and can't disagree with them. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great job, Harry. - Dank (push to talk) 03:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/List_of_field_marshals_of_the_British_Army&oldid=1075714077"