Talk:Egyptian Labour Corps mutinies
Latest comment: 21 days ago by Iainmacintyre in topic Did you know nomination
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Did you know nomination
edit
( )
- ... that twice in 1917 British soldiers in France opened fire on mutineers from the Egyptian Labour Corps, killing at least 27 of them?
- Source: Deaths were in two of the mutinies on 6 and 11 September: "the Egyptians tried to get out of their camp and were fired on by the garrison battalion, who killed twenty-three ... "reinforcements were called in. Again there was shooting, in which five were killed" from p255 of James, Lawrence (1987). Mutiny in the British and Commonwealth Forces, 1797-1956. London: Buchan & Enright. pp. 252–257. ISBN 0-907675-70-0. I have gone with 27 as >Grint, Keith (2021). Mutiny and Leadership. Oxford University Press. pp. 280–281. ISBN 978-0-19-289334-5. gives four killed on 11 September and the CWGC lists seven who died on that day.
Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk).
If it can run on 6 September:
- ALT1: ... that 107 years ago today British soldiers in France opened fire on mutineers from the Egyptian Labour Corps, killing 23 men?
Dumelow (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC).
- Reviewing
- Article is long enough and new enough
- Article is well written, neutral and supported by inline citations.
- Both hooks are short enough, correctly formatted and supported by inline citations.
- No copyvio detected on Earwig
- QPQ done
- I think the original hook is slightly ambiguous. It could be interpreted as meaning that at least 27 men were killed on each of the 2 occasions. If 'twice' was removed this would remove ambiguity and still be accurate.
So suggest ALT2 "... that in 1917 British soldiers in France opened fire on mutineers from the Egyptian Labour Corps, killing at least 27 of them?"
ALT1 approved for 6 September
- Altogether a very detailed, informative and interesting article
Papamac (talk) 17:54, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Papamac, thanks for your review. I am happy with your suggested ALT - Dumelow (talk) 10:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)