| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dominic Bruce article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Untitled
editPicture Date The caption below the picture states that it was taken "before 9th June 1941" (the date of Bruce's being shot down). However, his medal ribbon looks to be his AFM and the 1939-1945 Star. The 1939-1945 Star was instituted in 1943. An additional detail is that he is wearing the Observer's badge. This was replaced with Navigator and Bomb Aimer badges in April 1942 - however, some Observers kept the old badge for some time afterwards (I sadly can't find a citation for this; this is anecdotal). Is it possible this picture was taken after the proposed date of 1941? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.145.172 (talk) 01:39, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Plaudits I hope it is not considered poor form to simply declare that this superb biography is among the most enjoyable (and really quite thrilling), informative, and inspiring Wikipedia articles I've had the good fortune to stumble upon. Well done! Gaussgauss (talk) 12:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
- It is an unbelievable war story. To be a fly on the wall.Angloyearn (talk) 17:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Splitting the article Swiss Commission section
editAfter consulting these guidelines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Splitting. I have decided to do a ‘bold split’ of the article, and also to alert users to my split on the talk page... My reasoning is: the article is over 130kb, the guidelines here suggest the article should be considered for splitting at over 100kb. Also, the Swiss Commission section is now very long; and the Swiss Commission involved three main accomplices, this could make a reader assume the article has went off topic... If others think I have missed something and want to revert my bold split, with a bold revert, please do so. I take no offence at any edit or revert. I may be doing something wrong.
The Red Cross Swiss Commission escape section will not be linked to a main page linking to the a new article called the Red Cross Swiss Commission.Angloyearn (talk) 09:40, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Missing source
edit@Angloyearn In this edit you added a short-form reference to Felton (2014), but didn't add the corresponding long-form bibliographic information to the article. Could you do that? Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 14:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
- Cheers for the notification. As you can see, I'm a bit late responding here. The literature in question references a book by Mark Felton, I'll sort it out. Thanks.Angloyearn (talk) 18:26, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Wham2001 (talk) 06:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)