Talk:Sir William Robertson, 1st Baronet

message: Finally thought to look up the ODNB article, though this is a subscription source, most British library users will find that they have access online via their library service's subscription - check your concil webpages for details.  This reference does not support the claim that he served in every rank on his way from private to field marshal, only that he was the first British soldier to do so (he doesn't ever seem to have been RSM for example, only Troop Sergeant-Major).  I've also made a start on using the London Gazette to reference commissions, decorations, senior appointments etc, by finding the ref for his DSO.  More here http://www.gazette-online.co.uk/searchresults.aspx?GeoType=London&st=adv&sb=date&exact=William%20Robert%20Robertson&pg=1 - searching on initials only, rather than full forenames will probably find others.  David Underdown (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NCO promotions now added.Paulturtle (talk) 14:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In an early paragraph it states
Is this trying to indicate that the promotion and training to officer rank occurred in India?  If yes, then the mention of India needs to occur earlier.  Can I also say that more seems to be commentary rather than encyclopaedic in its form and there probably should be some structure review to the sentences. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I have deleted the commentary and added some more facts. Dormskirk (talk) 23:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have his autobiography if you want anything looking up Kernel Saunters (talk) 22:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Many thanks for that. Dormskirk (talk) 23:43, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be good to have this citeable comment if you can find it. Dormskirk (talk) 23:34, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Hi - Do you have a page number for this? Dormskirk (talk) 12:43, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification required ... 

message: Hi, I uploaded a scan of the original negative of the image used in the infobox. The quality/resolution is better but I didn't upload over it because I wasn't sure how it should be cropped (if at all). Also the infobox image has more of his sword strangely. Opencooper (talk) 10:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better image 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sir William Robertson, 1st Baronet. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061210191546/http://oll.libertyfund.org/Home3/Author.php?recordID=0505 to http://oll.libertyfund.org/Home3/Author.php?recordID=0505
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:00, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is an extremely well written and thoroughly researched piece of work. Congratulations to the editors who have worked on it.   Buistr (talk) 05:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: An editor has tagged the page as "too long to read and navigate comfortable". I am removing the tag as I think, in this case, the length is not unreasonable and fragmenting the flow of the article would be unhelpful. I happy to consider proposals from a willing editor as to how they propose to spilt it. Dormskirk (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately at over 18k words of readable prose, the length is entirely unreasonable - see WP:SIZE and WP:SUMMARY. The article would benefit from significant summarization to make it more accessible to the general readership. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:49, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As already indicated above, I disagree. Are you prepared to do the work to condense it? If not this seems to be a case of WP:DRIVEBY and the tag should not be readded. Dormskirk (talk) 15:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, your edit is in extremely strong contrast to the congratulatory section immediately above. Clearly, at least one other editor likes the way it is currently written. Dormskirk (talk) 15:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Yes, I am absolutely willing to work on it. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. In which case that's fine. Please go-ahead. Many thanks, Dormskirk (talk) 15:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too long?