Talk:List of surviving veterans of World War I/Archive 1

message: I think this is a point that may warrant a general discussion.
It is sometimes very difficult to verify whether a WW 1 veteran listed in the article is in fact still among the living. This applies to former soldiers like Pawel Parniak (who, if still alive, would possibly be older than Mercado del Toro), but also to Stephen Butcher, the elusive UK soldier who was twice on the list and got twice deleted (see discussion point Butcher). The problem appears to be that in some cases the last documented information about this person is a newspaper article mentioning him / her in a list of surviving veterans, but that the world then, at some stage, forgot about them or was unable to trace them.
The question is: if no _documented_ evidence for the death of a veteran exists - should the person in question be counted as dead or alive?  (By "documented" I mean something more than our personal beliefs!) --Josias Bunsen 23:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you there should be clarity. Extremely sexy 00:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: So what new nickname would you propose? Extremely sexy 19:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the default "life" or "death"? 

message: Greetings,
If nothing else, this current debate has stirred new ideas.  I think we need a 'period of service' column. For one, suppose someone is claimed to be 'last Somme survivor' (as happened erroneously recently).  If we had a list noting periods of service, it would be easier to track.  
Consider the ultimate extreme: we have, on the one hand, a man from Pennsylvania who served 'one hour' on Nov 11 1918 (considerably less time than Robley Rex did).  Technically a WWI veteran according to some.  And I wouldn't argue with that.  But, if one of the foci here is history, then we want to know who are the remaining 'nuggets'--which veterans have first-hand remembrances from what time, place, etc.
And the ultimate in the other direction may be Mr. Maurice Floquet of France.  Consider: some have said that there are no more 'combat-wounded' veterans, but Mr. Floquet was wounded in action three times, incurring life-threatening injuries (it was said that in one instance, a German soldier saved his life).  Mr Floquet joined...not in 1919, not in 1918, not in 1917...but in 1914.  Mr. Floquet fought at the Somme, at Chemin des Dames, etc.  Incredibly, he is still alive at 111 years old.  I don't think any other veteran left can say they were all of these: joined in 1914; combat veteran; combat-wounded veteran; veteran of the trenches.  
A few others bear mentioning.  We know that Mr Allingham is the last Jutland survivor and the last founding member of the RAF.  Mr Harry Patch is the 'last Tommy,' last British infantryman.  And Robert Meier of Germany, 109, actually fought in the trenches on the German side.  Antonio Pierro, at 110, though a driver of supplies, did fight in the Meuse-Argonne offensive.  But for several of the 60+ remaining veterans, we know next to nothing...what did the Italian veterans see in combat?  Did they serve on the front lines vs. the Austrians?  Also, I think the loss of Alfred Alfredson, last survivor of the '1914 Christmas truce,' was an historic loss, and we only have a very few remaining veterans who actually fought on the front lines.  While people like Philip Mayne, royal engineer, are important, I do think everyone can agree that these people and this list is significant mainly due to the rarity/uniqueness of the remaining 'living connections' to the past.  We simply don't know all the stories, and so if Mr Floquet were to pass away, can we say there is another 1914 veteran left?  → R Young {yakłtalk} 00:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Add period of service' compromise

message: Greetings,
This newspaper article confirms that Maurice Starkey reached age 104, AND it lists him as having served in 1918.  NO information suggesting that he enrolled in 1919 has yet been located.
Cases should be deleted one at a time, not as a batch.  Maybe this case is worth saving.
http://www.pottstownmercury.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15688571&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=18041&rfi=6
For centenarian, haircut is old hat 
Mercury Staff Report, Mercury Staff Report12/04/2005
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
ROYERSFORD -- Any of us who make it to 104 years old might not ask for much more of a birthday present than making it to our 104th birthday. 
Having done that Saturday, the only other thing Maurice Starkey asked for was a haircut.
Advertisement
And that’s what he got Saturday morning at the Washington Street Salon.
→ R Young {yakłtalk} 06:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I visited and interviewed Maurice Starkey in April of this year.  He is a delightful gentleman.  During the visit, I had the opportunity to examine his discharge papers, and I can state with authority that he enlisted in July, 1919.  According the rules of this article, he should be moved to the "World War I era Veteran" column.  AEF Doughboy 19:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Maurice Starkey

message: Greetings,
Searching for Felix Bustos, I found his WWII papers...
U.S. World War II Army Enlistment Records, 1938-1946 Record 
about Felix Bustos 
Name: Felix Bustos 
Birth Year: 1903  
Race: White, citizen  
    
Enlistment Date: 11 Apr 1942 
Branch Code: Branch Immaterial - Warrant Officers, USA  
Grade: Private  
Grade Code: Private  
Term of Enlistment: Enlistment for the duration of the War or other emergency, plus six months, subject to the discretion of the President or otherwise according to law  
Component: Selectees (Enlisted Men)  
Source: Civil Life  
    
Education: Grammar school  
Civil Occupation: Automobile Serviceman  
Marital Status: Single, without dependents  
Height: 64  
Weight: 129  
 
However, this doesn't prove he didn't serve in WWI. Going back further, Felix is listed as age '17' in Jan 1920, suggesting he was born in 1902 as claimed.  Also, if he did serve, he must have been back by Jan 1 1920. Again, this doesn't prove he did not serve in WWI, but I have found no evidence that he did.
1920 United States Federal Census Record 
about Felix Bustos 
Name: Felix Bustos 
Age: 17 years  
Estimated birth year: abt 1903 
Birthplace: Colorado 
Race: White 
Home in 1920: Cucharas, Huerfano, Colorado 
Sex: Male  
Marital status: Single  
Relation to Head of House: Son  
Able to read: Yes  
Able to Write: Yes  
Mother's Birth Place: Colorado  
Father's Birth Place: Colorado  
Image: 218  
 
Image Source: Year: 1920; Census Place: Cucharas, Huerfano, Colorado; Roll: T625_165; Page: 1A; Enumeration District: 85; Image: 218.
→ R Young {yakłtalk} 15:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Felix Bustos busted?

message: Folks,
I like the way the article layout the way it is now, and there's an explanation of who did what for each veteran.  But I suggest that we could make a 'combat veteran list,' either separately, or by * those cases that are confirmed to have fought in WWI.
Because, we see some arguing that the criteria for WWI veteran 'cutoff' is the Armistice...well there's that man from Pennsylvania, who served one hour on a train before being sent home...honorable, yes, but clearly he has no actual memory of the war front itself, or faced actual bullets or bombs.  So, not to dismiss those who valiantly volunteered only to find their services unneeded, but to make 'purists' happy why don't we give extra recognition to those who actually served in combat?  And, I think giving extra recognition is better than 'taking away' from recognition of others.  Finally, when we see reports like this one:
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=17249239&method=full&siteid=62484&headline=the-tommy-of-the-trenches--name_page.html
It is moving what Harry had to go through, but these stories always seem to forget the other ones. Henry Allingham, notably, served mainly in the 'RAF' but he has first-hand memory of the trenches, shot at or not:
:Henry got a taste of the trenches when he was sent to clear the fields of German booby traps. He pauses, then says: "I fell down a deep hole which was full of bits of bodies - legs, arms, ears, rotten flesh... and rats. It was night-time and I scrambled around, not knowing what I was touching and too scared to imagine it. I thank God that I scrambled out alive when it finally got light."
Also, this IS an English Wikipedia, but there seems to always been a forgetting of the horrors that others have been through.  Maurice Floquet of France, for example, was seriously wounded in combat...yet we rarely, if ever, see any mention of him in the English or American press.  Indeed, if we really are to honor those that have fallen, wouldn't it be better to pull back from the nationalistic worldview that precipitated the crisis in the first place, to realize that 'we're all human' and the stories of others need to be told as well.  Indeed, what was really historic for me is to see that Germany's oldest man, age 109, still has his WWI uniform...and while the Germans were 'wrong' for the invasion, this was at a time when Britain had colonized nearly half the world...the sun 'never set' on the British Empire...yet this was 'right' because we are fed 'victor's history.'  So, once again we are left that the best way to tell real history is to hear real survivors tell it, and that it's best to hear various viewpoints from all sides.  And while many tend to think of the French and Brits as doing the 'dirty work,' then the U.S. comes in, let's take a moment to remember that the Americans lost what, 118,000 men, and that we still have 'combat heroes' like Antonio Pierro, 110, an actual survivor of the Meuse-Argonne offensive. Finally, we have people like Moses Hardy, who only saw '39 days' in actual combat (out of one year total service), but combat nonetheless, he could easily have been gassed to death.  We can debate the merits of dates or whatever and no list will really ever be totally fair...if someone was driving the supply truck, instead of being shot at at the front lines, maybe it wasn't as dangerous, yet it was still a vital job and the truck could have been bombed or blown up.  So, we can debate forever about who is the 'most courageous' but I think that it's best to tell the veteran's stories and let the readers decide for themselves.  → R Young {yakłtalk} 12:35, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Combat' veteran

message: Whilst, again, I don't doubt the info posted, as Newcombe was quite ill anyway, is there ANY online source to back it up? 
If not, it's not too much problem, as when it comes to the 11th November, there'll be some kind of proof one way or another with the survivors & the totals etc.
:Well, I do doubt the info presented, and I believe we have another case of vandalism here. For anybody not familiar with the problem: User 82.12.157.30 deleted the names of Harry Newcombe and John Newman from the list of British veterans. In the wiki biography of Harry Newcombe, the following line started to appear: "Newcombe lived in Worthing until he passed away, after a long fight against illness, in early 2006." 
:Given the fact that the anonymous user was unable to provide an exact death date, and given the fact that Joe Churcher, the Political Correspondent of the Press Association (PA) was able to state on 27 June 2006, in his article "Veterans who still survive" that Harry Newcombe was still alive, it appears to me that the information provided by anonymous user is less than correct. I have therefore returned the article to its original position. Happy to reconsider if anonymous provides an exact date and source (as I have now done). Josias Bunsen 20:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote to the journalist who wrote all articles about him when he was still alive, and she confirmed he had died. Extremely sexy 21:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So, Bart, when exactly did he die? And what about Mr Newman? Josias Bunsen 12:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She thinks in April, since she telephoned a member of his family in May after having heard a rumour about him having died, who responded he already had died 5 weeks before, but they didn't want any fuss anymore about him since he already had been featured several times when he was still alive, hence. P.S.: I consider the other guy's reported death earlier this year as well to be true also since Mr. Harbourart is a renowned source, and I noticed he reinstated their deaths. Extremely sexy 14:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I cannot agree more with you, and thanks for calling me "a reliable source" too, along with Peter: I'm flattered. Extremely sexy 21:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newcombe/Newman UK veterans 

message: Who keeps changing Pawel's birthdate to "1899"?  Whether Pawel was born in 1890 or not, to simply make up a fake birthdate is worse than reporting his age as "1890?"  Pawel claims to be born in 1890, but his age is not verified.  No where has anyone stated where a birth claim of 1899 came from.  Simply to make up false data is not what Wikipedia should be about. 131.96.70.164 23:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pawel Parniak birthdate

message: What happened to Reuben Law? He is the subject of the CNN article "WWI veterans remember their service" dated November 11, 2003. I don't see his name on the current list, nor the list of those passing in 2003, 2004, or 2005.
:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veterans of the First World War who died in 2005
 Bart Versieck 02:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe this has been corrected, Josias. Bart Versieck 22:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, the problem with him is the authenticity of his age, as you know. Bart Versieck 21:39, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Parniak's age is debateable, but is his veteran status in question?Acctorp 23:38, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I don't think so. Bart Versieck 21:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

text: You mean William Evan Allan, and your wish is my command, man. Bart Versieck 21:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Apparently it's under their country of service, f.e. Gerald Myer Jerry Lewis, who lived in the U.S.A. and had been a citizen over there since many years, is listed as a Canadian, because he fought for Canada in WWI, although he did fight for the U.S.A. too, but then in WWII, so for some other as well, and for a few still living ones applies exactly the same. Bart Versieck 21:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Presently some individuals are listed twice or under nationality instead of solely under country of service. So, for example, should we move Saci Ben Hocine Mahdi, Syd Lucas, and Teofilo Gillarduzzi respectively into France, UK, and Austria-Hungary columns? Acctorp 23:10, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean, so yes. Bart Versieck 22:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Seems like a good idea.  I suggest that individuals listed twice each explicitly state nationality &/or residence as well as what flag they served under, to avoid confusion.  Acctorp 02:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  General point 

message: The graph on the decline of the veterans may be in principle a good idea (if somewhat ghoulish), but I think we just have too little information to come up with one right now. For instance, the indication that less than 10 veterans died in 2000 is very difficult to accept - I believe we simply don't have enough information about all the veterans who died in 2000, and therefore only few of them are mentioned on the '2000' page. 
The assertion that "by 2006, all of them will be gone" is exceedingly speculative, and, I believe, not a very convincing guesstimate either. There is a fair chance that there will be at least one WW1 veteran who was born in 1900 and lives until 2010 (personally, I think there may well be veterans who will live to see the centenary of the outbreak of the war).
Josias Bunsen 17:22, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Graph 

message: http://www.tarnow.pl/media/radio_maks/aktualnosci_full.php?fn=200502071702
=> well, this page is blank (and otherwish in Polish), so tell me when exactly he died, please? Bart Versieck 10:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karol Marek dead 

message: Does the deletion of Stephen Butcher mean that he is dead? Does anyone know when he died? Michael Streich, 23.02.2006
:I am a bit concerned about the deletion of Butcher. We know that he celebrated his 100th birthday in February 2004, so he would today be 102 years old - which does not strike me as utterly unrealistic. http://www.navynews.co.uk/articles/2004/0402/0004022003.asp All the same, I do notice that he is not often mentioned in news articles listing WW1 veterans. On the other hand, the person who deleted him from the list of surviving WW 1 veterans did not have the courtesy to transfer his name to any of the other lists (such as "Veterans who died in 2006 / 2005 / 2004"), so what exactly did become of him? Josias Bunsen 15:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say I agree with you. Extremely sexy 16:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm! One is given to wondering whether Mr Bart Versieck (the author of the above message, dated 16:30, 4 August 2006) would have the kindness to explain what he meant by "extremely sexy" in this context. Josias Bunsen 22:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just a nickname, my dear friend. Extremely sexy 23:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Right! I have added Mr Butcher to the list of WW 1 veterans for the UK. I do believe that the above link makes the case for him. I would also refer you to the article "First World War 90th Anniversary: The Survivors" in the Birmingham Post, 4 August 2004. If anybody wishes to delete him, would they kindly provide another source that would justify this, and would they also add Stephen Butcher to one of the categories mentioned above ("died in 2004 / 2005 / 2006..."). --Josias Bunsen 19:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: That's enough for me, and I definitely do believe you, but are you Richard from the site that has disappeared, sadly, dealing with World War I Veterans, who met several British WW I veterans, and, if so, could you provoede me with a link to your website, my dear friend? Extremely sexy 10:58, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah, okay then, and thanks for the information, but Peter is here as well you mean, my dear friend?
Richard alias Peter, I am heartbroken to hear that you don't like my attitude. It's funny what ticks people off – take me for example, I get ever so slightly miffed about folks who go around deleting veterans without providing a source. However, I note that you have provided us with a reference now. However vague the mention of "Mr Butcher's local paper" may be, it does show that you have learnt your lesson – I had no doubt you would. --Josias Bunsen 20:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I hope Peter will read this discussion too. Extremely sexy 14:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stephen Butcher 

message: There is a movement in the UK to give their last WWI veteran a state funeral.  Some veterans have indicated that they and/or their families would not welcome the intrusion a state funeral would bring.  Also, a state funeral is usually reserved for heads of state or persons of "national significance."  One alternate idea is to hold a memorial service honoring the generation that fought in the war.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4919818.stm
--JMD4LSU 21:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  State funeral for last British WWI veteran? 

message: Hope this is not too far OT - but does anyone know what happened to the Victoria Cross message forum regarding World War I surviving soldiers? I can no longer get the page to open. Has it been closed for some reason? Thanks. Frankwomble 16:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Victoria Cross forum status

message: Does anyone know the status of George Ward of Fayetteville, NC?  He was alive as of 2004 at the age of 103 or 104.  If he's still with us, he may be the most decorated surviving WWI vet, as he received the Distinguished Service Cross.  I can't find an obit or a SSDI entry.  Acctorp 23:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you tell us what more you know about Mr. Ward, Acctorp?  Can you direct us to any articles about him?
There were no George Ward's listed in the SSDI dying in North Carolina in 2004, 2005, or 2006 that could possibly be a WWI veteran. I would say there's a good chance he's still alive, as the SSDI records 95% of all deaths in the U.S.
→ R Young {yakłtalk} 14:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: George Ward

message: In an 18 April 2006 article in the Guardian Unlimited the veterans minister, Don Touhig, stated that there may be other female veterans of WWI alive in the UK. Does anyone know who they are? 
Here's the quote from him: "Inevitably, the numbers of surviving veterans of world war one will dwindle, but the numbers of those known to us do go up as well as down," he said. "For example, the announcement of the death of our last-known female veteran has prompted claims that there are two others still alive."
Here's the link to the article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1756215,00.html Frankwomble 14:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional female British World War I veterans living?

message: I find that surprising.... Rich Farmbrough 09:29 8  June 2006 (UTC).
Well, they did pull out of the war earlier, and with all the chaos of the revolution there simply may not be any records. Czolgolz 12:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... between the Russian Revolution, WWII and Stalins purges there may very well not be any left. I mean WWII cost Russia some 3 million men and the purges some 10-20 million people. The average lifespan in Russia isn't that great and wasn't during the Soviet era either. Just saying - I wouldn't be surprised if there are none left. Gardar Rurak 05:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: None for Russia

message: This means no change to the intro para, no re-definition of inclusion rules, and therefore, regular revert-wars about whether the names in the lists are really veterans or not.  This means that we ignore Armistice day, Nov 11, 1918 and include other informally-defined "World War I-Era" vets who joined the armed forces after that date in the standard lists.  No cut-off criteria specified.  Specifially, this means that Stillman, Munger and Robley stay on the list as they currently are.
SUPPORT:
SUPPORT--Frankwomble 10:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Status Quo (1 vote)

message: Use the following new defn in the opening para:
:Veterans, for the purposes of this article, have been agreed to be those that were members of the armed forces of one of the nations involved in the war, up to and including the date of the armstice that ended the war on Nov 11, 1918. Other World-War I era veterans are listed seperately.  For some countries, this may vary from the policy in use.
If there is debate, the entry in these - the existing - tables should include a link to evidence of a join date on or before Nov 11, 1918. While this evidence does not exist, the name should be moved to the 'Others' section.
People in training at the cut-off date are to be included in the veterans list.
The 'Others' section would be titled Other World War I-Era Veterans and would have the following intro para:
:Listed here are those that joined the armed services after the Armistice date, or where there is debate on their join-date but for some reason are considered WWI-era vets by some authority.
The reasons, and the authority, should be given in a 'Notes' column.
Specifically, Stillman, Munger and Robely all go in the 'Other' table.
Overall totals both with and without the 'Others' list to be included
SUPPORT:
SUPPORT (Having read just this, nothing else - this sounds eminently sensible to me) jkm 11:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: System-wide Nov 11, 1918 cut-off date, additional list of 'Other veterans' (8 votes) SELECTED

message: No change to the intro para, but the following sentence to be added at the start of the USA list
:Veterans, for the purposes of this section, have been agreed to be those that were members of the United States armed forces, up to and including the date of the armstice that ended the war on Nov 11, 1918. Other World-War I era USA veterans are listed seperately.  For some cases, this may vary from the policy in use by the USA Veterans Administration.
If there is debate, the entry the existing USA table should include a link to evidence of a join date on or before Nov 11, 1918. While this evidence does not exist, the name should be moved to the 'Others' section.
People in training at the cut-off date are to be included in the veterans list.
The 'Others' section would be titled Other USA World War I-Era Veterans and would have the following intro para:
:Listed here are those that joined the USA armed services after the Armistice date, or where there is debate on their join-date but for some reason are considered WWI-era vets by some authority.
The reasons, and the authority, should be given in a 'Notes' column.
Specifically, Stillman, Munger and Robely all go in the 'Other USA vets' table.
Overall totals both with and without the 'Others' list to be included
SUPPORT:
SUPPORT (Again, sounds a sensible compromise to me) jkm 11:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: USA-only Nov 11, 1918 cut-off date, additional list of 'Other USA veterans' (5 votes)

message: If you vote for this, you need to also vote for one of 2-5
SUPPORT:
SUPPORT→ R Young {yakłtalk} 22:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Same as options 2-5, but forces membership cut-off date of the [[Treaty of Versailles]], Germany signed June 28, 1919 (2 votes)

message: Make this distinction as a new column in the existing table, or as an additonal table in the existing page.  Combat vets are those that saw combat on the battlefield [needs more defn to avoid arguments].  Stillman, Munger and Robely (and Emiliano Mercardo Del Toro) would be considered non-combat vets.
SUPPORT:
SUPPORT (In principle - not mandatory, but certainly encouraged if sources can be provided) jkm 12:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Instead, make a distinction between 'combat vets' and non-combat' vets (1 vote)

message: SUPPORT:
SUPPORT (A country's own position, if known, should be respected) jkm 12:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Each countries own definition should be recognised, documented and used (3 votes)

message: * Off y'all go. I'm not voting, unless there is a tie --Rye1967 03:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You make an excellent point here, and pose a question that has troubled me from the beginning: What is the extant evidence, documentary or otherwise, regarding the World War I service of each veteran on this list? Frankwomble 20:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: COMMENTS:

message: Given the discussion about veteran status and how some veterans are recognised as World War I veterans by authorities even though they may not have explicitly served during the time readily understood as being defined as World War I, with the main reason being they were involved in some campaign - ala the US Expeditions to Russia for instance, that co-relates closely to World War I. I'd like to know all the conflicts of that era that involved foreign troops in some capacity.
Looking through the main Wikipedia page for World War I in fact gives links to all of these conflicts here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war_I#Main_articles
Those conflicts listed are (I've provided the Wikipedia dates of these conflicts):
:First Balkan War (October 8th, 1912 - May 18th, 1913)
:Second Balkan War (June 19th, 1913 - August 9th, 1913)
:Maritz Rebellion (South Africa) (September 1914 - July 1915)
:Easter Rising (Ireland) (April 24th - 30th, 1916)
:Russian Revolution (February 1917 - November 1917)
:Russian Civil War (May 1918 - October 1922: Japanese withdrawal)
:North Russia Campaign (May 1918 - July 1919)
:Wielkopolska Uprising (Poland) (December 27th, 1918 - February 16th, 1919)
:Polish-Soviet War (February 1919 - March 18th, 1921)
:Turkish War of Independence (May 19th, 1919 - October 29th, 1923)
(This includes the Turkish-Armenian War, the Greco-Turkish War and the Franco-Turkish War)
These 2 aren't listed as contemporaneous conflicts, but I can't figure out why - may have to be edited for inclusion.
:Irish War of Independence (January 1919 - July 1921)
:Irish Civil War (June 28th, 1922 - May 24th, 1923)
The Treaty of Lausanne, that tied up most of the fraying loose ends of World War I was finally signed with the new Turkish Government, and the Entente powers, on July 24th, 1923, effectively signalling an end to the messy situations that had sparked up over the past 10 years which included and were centred on World War I.
There is much debate about the exact dates that some of the above conflicts should be dated for, and I don't pretend to know if the dates above are indeed completely faithful to history, but, all the above conflicts involved the interference, politically and especially militarily, of foreign powers sticking their noses and their troops in - not always where they were wanted. As previous arguments raging on this page show, veterans who may have served in one of these confrontations - but somehow actually missed serving at all in the generally recognised period of World War I, may have some difficulty being able to explain that difference - or even be aware there is a difference - and this seems to be the basis of many of the arguments upon who should be included in this list.
I really don't know how many veterans from these conflicts are still around, at a guess I'd say a handful - does anyone know if there are any Japanese still around who served time in Russia during the Russian Civil War? I would highly doubt it, but I guess its possible.
If there is an inclusion of an others list below the main listings on the page because of uncertainty over the veracity of any claim being made on there, if appropriate, reference could be made to which of these conflicts it is thought that the veteran actually served. Any expansion of the main list to include all remaining veterans of these conflicts in the others section would be quite a task, (and I'm not asking anyong to do it, but it may be worth doing for its own reasons?), but really probably not needed. 
I just believe wider knowledge of these World War I Era conflicts can possibly aid better understanding of how to assess any claims being made about World War I veteran status - maybe an old vet remembers serving in some conflict at the time - which he's certain must have been World War I - but maybe the evidence doesn't back that up - maybe its merely because the conflict he is remembering is one of the above?
For instance - Foreign Countries Involved In The Russian Civil War: Czechs, Japanese, Americans, Canadians, Poles, Serbs, Romanians, Italians, British, French. Obivously this is one area where we already have conflict, but are there any non-American vets from foreign incursions during the Russian Civil War? Does anyone know? jkm 17:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World War I Era Conflicts / Conflicts Contemporaneous & Inter-Related with World War I 

message: Greetings, it is not my intention to make this 'my article,' but we have seen time and again anonymous users such as User 24 attempt to insert text, without reference to back it up, and unwilling to compromise anything from their position.  Despite User 24 calling my position a 'minority view,' actually the position I favor is doing quite well...including 'WWI-era veterants' within the article but in an 'other' list.  That doesn't sound like we need such an exclusive and one-sided statement as 'this article deals exclusively with WWI veterans'...especailly after proceeding to dictate who is or is not a WWI veteran.  Certainly the Robley Rex suppporters claim him to be a WWI veteran, having joined in 'May 1918' (he says).  The 'disclaimer' is one-sided and contrary to the spirit of not deciding until after July 9, when the votes are in and a decision is made.  155.41.112.1 22:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WWI-era disclaimers

message: Whilst I don't doubt that he is dead, I can't see a source for it on the "died in 2006" page. Is there a source online at all? Not querying it, more curious, I suppose.
:http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2106344292 Extremely sexy 23:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's my pleasure. Extremely sexy 12:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  August Bischof 

message: For the purposes of fairness, I made a separate 'unvalidated' section.  From the remaining lists, I think almost everyone agrees that the cases from Canada, France, Italy, the UK, etc are validated.  However, for Poland, we don't even know if these people are still alive.  Pawel's claim to 116 is not verified, and he has no WWI papers.  Thus, to be fair, IF undocumented US claims shouldn't be included in the main list, neither should Polish ones.  IF someone has another case they'd like to discuss, we can discuss it.
For Starkey and Robley Rex, there is no disputing their service, only the time began.  This is different from the three American and four Polish cases (whose service is not established).131.96.70.164 00:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unvalidated claims

message: If someone can document any of the Polish claims, we could rehabilitate them to the main list.  It does appear that one may be dead and at least one doesn't have records, what about the other two?131.96.70.158 18:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish veterans

message: Does anyone know whether or not Mr. Thomas Nelson, Sr., age 111, currently residing in Texas, formerly of Louisiana, served in the military before, during or after World War I?  Can anyone provide any further biographical information on Mr. Nelson -- where he was born, where he lives now, etc.?  Finally, can anyone post links to any articles about Mr. Nelson?  Any information would be appreciated.
Well, let's look at what Ancestry says:-
There are 13 Draft Cards for WWI for a Thomas Nelson, of Louisiana 6 of which fit into the age category. There are other bits & pieces of information that can then be found from there, providing that is the correct info. Have you got any more details - middle name, initial, date of birth etc. to help us so we can help you?
Why speculate?  It was never mentioned anywhere that he is a WWI veteran.  He runs a candy store.  However, Silas Simmons is a closer candidate, based on what he said about 'loading ammunition' during WWI (at the shipyards).68.19.49.79 09:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why speculate?  Because he's in the right age range, and if there's a chance he served we sould check it out.  What's this about him running a candy store?
Thomas Nelson spent most of his life running a candy store.  He doesn't strike me as someone who would have served.  He is African-American.  → R Young {yakłtalk} 12:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree -- that kind of speculation is bizarre.  If you had the opportunity to meet and talk with him, Robert, why didn't you just ask him if he'd served?  What is it about running a candy store that makes someone unlikely to be called up for the draft?  Does he have a draft card on file?
One would think that if he served, the news article would have mentioned it.  But I find your statements hypocritical vis-a-vis the Silas Simmons comment.68.158.231.109 07:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thomas Nelson, Sr.

message: :Who is Silas Simmons?
Silas Simmons was born Oct 14 1895, according to his WWI draft card:
Name: Silas Joseph Simmons 
City: Philadelphia  
County: Philadelphia  
State: Pennsylvania  
BirthPlace: Delaware  
Birth Date: 14 Oct 1895  
Race: African  
Roll: 1907647  
DraftBoard: 27  
→ R Young {yakłtalk} 12:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a discussion of the relative merits of peoples' service.  It's merely a question of service.  A veteran is someone who served in the armed forces; it's irrelevant where he or she served and what exactly they did.  Do we know whether Mr. Simmons loaded ships as a civilian or as a serviceman?  Where did he load them?  Where does he live now?  Has anyone interviewed him?
So, people, which way do you want it?  Asking about Thomas Nelson (no evidence at all) is acceptable, but not Silas Simmons (draft card, newspaper mentions war)?68.158.231.109 07:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: What is the point of all this squabbling?  It's not bringing us any closer to possibly identifying one or more heretofore unknown World War I veterans.  Robert, if you or anyone else have any more information on Thomas Nelson, Silas Simmons, or both, please share it.  And if anyone has actually spoken with either of these men, please let us all know.  (I'd do it myself if I had a clue where to get in touch with them.)  Time is running out; these are not young men.  Let's do all that we can to recognize them while they're still living.  AEF Doughboy 00:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Silas Simmons?

message: Greetings,
I've been told by a reliable French source that there are two more French WWI veterans not yet revealed.  Bear in mind the French government requires a certain minimum (3 months) service to count as a 'poilu.'  However, there are still French WWI veterans left not on the list that served at least 1 day. → R Young {yakłtalk} 02:25, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More French veterans?

message: I have been following this discussion for some time now and have been wondering if there is anyone tracking surviving veterans in the former Russian Empire, the former Ottoman Empire and some of the other states of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Jtscotto 13:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian/Turkish/Austrian/Hungarian surviving veterans?

message: Greetings,
I've been told by a reliable source that all 11 Italian veterans were confirmed alive as of Sept 21, 2006.  Thus, it seems that Italy's larger-than-expected numbers continue to hold up.  Bear in mind this has much to do with life expectancy, as Italian male life expectancy (esp. for 80+) remains among the highest in Europe.
France, meanwhile, has at least 10 remaining veterans (but two anonymous).  The UK has 5 officially (but 3 in Australia and 1 in Canada means there's really 9).  The U.S. total of 14 is likely still incomplete...if we include Robley Rex (who claims to have joined May 1918) that's 15.  Given we had two U.S. veterans emerge in August 2006 on the same day, the chances are high that a few more U.S. veterans will be found. → R Young {yakłtalk} 04:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and his name is Giovanni Alunni. Extremely sexy 21:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Thomas Breining, who is also a very capable German 105+ tracker, does that job really well for the German survivors. Extremely sexy 21:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Italian veterans

message: Greetings, we see Harold Gardner moved to the dead list, but no news article citation was given, and the editing was from an IP address.  Can anyone confirm that Harold has really passed away, or is this a prank? → R Young {yakłtalk} 07:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unverified Deaths

message: I interviewed Lloyd Brown at his home in Maryland on November 18, 2004.  At that time, he told me he was born on October 7, 1899.  I believe this to be accurate.  Does anyone out there have any reason to believe otherwise? AEF Doughboy 19:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Moreover, his daughter, Nancy Espina, told me 1901 is correct, dear friends. Extremely sexy 14:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lloyd Brown

message: O.M. Peterson (b. 27 Feb 1900) should be added to the list of surviving U.S. WWI veterans.  Information per the VA Media Office, Chris Scheer.  Peterson resides at the Spokane State Nursing Home, contact: Marv King (509) 344-5779.  I spoke to King who confirmed that Peterson is in fact a WWI veteran, and alive.
:I visited and interviewed Mr. Peterson (his full name is Orin Manfred Peterson) in Spokane in October, 2005.  I can confirm that he is, indeed, a World War I veteran.  He enlisted in the cavalry, was later transfered to an infantry unit, and did not ship out for France.  His older brother was wounded, likely at Belleau Wood.  O.M. Peterson also served in WWII -- says he was drafted!  AEF Doughboy 20:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  O.M. Peterson 

message: Greetings,
Does anyone want to confess to being this user? It's not me and it's very close to my IP, likely a user at Georgia State University.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 03:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: User 131.212.109.27

message: Could these two people be removed from World War 1 veterans? They both joined the army after the armistice so obviously they are not World War 1 veterans. The government also does not recognize them as being vets. Only some press articles mention them and these could be from tabloid and thus unreliable.
Please leave as-is.  This was already discussed and voted on this summer.  The decision was to keep them but as footnotes.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 00:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Munger, Stillman Hiram & Maurice Starkey

message: The only reference we have is to a yahoo group.  Should this actually count? Czolgolz 00:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Anonymous French veterans

message: I have it from a good source that Ernest Pusey died Nov 19.  However, so far I haven't seen a press mention.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 02:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ernest Pusey death

message: I Sent a letter to Mr Peterson, and received a response from his Nephew that visits him, and knows quite a lot about him.  Mr. Peterson is blind, and is in bad health, but asked his Nephew to respond to my letter. Orin Peterson joined the Army in 1919 after the war the letter states.  Until you have some proof - which you probably will not, as it doesn't exist, then he needs to be removed from the WWI Vets, and put into the WWI-era Vets. Also the two French Veterans, if they do not wish for anyone to know who they are, lets remove them, and after they die, put them in the  year placement they died. PershinBoy                        ________________________________________________                                                              I don't know about Mr. Peterson, but if he is a WWI-era vet, then OK, move him down.    
As to the French WWI vets, please note that this table is intended to reflect what we know, and we know there are two more, publicly identified or not.  I have heard there is a plan to reveal their identity after the French gov't announces the death of the 'last' French WWI veteran.  That is, if the 'big 4' poilus die first, then we will find out who the other two are...it would indeed make for a more gripping story. Again, these two come from the same source as Rene Riffaud, who was legitimate. Thus, I conclude there are two more and they should be listed, at least, as unverified...68.154.125.209 18:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orin Peterson Is a World War 1-era Veteran 

message: Gladys Powers? Isn't it John Babcock? See CBC official website. GoodDay 18:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean, thanks for the clarification. PS- you should create an account. GoodDay 18:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: See Wikipedia:How to log in & Wikipedia: Username, for information. GoodDay 20:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada's 3 surviving World War I veterans?

message: Hi,just for everyone's clarification, I have added Kosa & Wycech to the main list as they enlisted in 1917. I admit I haven't got Polish records at hand, but numerous newspaper sources list 1917 as an enlistment date, and quite frankly, there is enough there to suggest they are genuine WWI veterans as opposed to say, for example, Violet Bolaise, or some of the German veterans, of whom almost nothing is known.
I suspect Parniak is a WWI veteran too, but just lying about his age, so someone may want to move him into the main category. Sorry about the tables but I found it very difficult when all I wanted to do was move a guy from one category to another.
I didn't want to move them and not explain why. Both were featured in a Polish WWI programme, so both are still alive (or were on the 11th November).
Please also note Wycech's birthdate, which genuinely, is 11th November 1902.
Thanks,
Richard J (who has a Polish brother-in-law who helped with translation!)
Previous notes:
If someone can document any of the Polish claims, we could rehabilitate them to the main list.  It does appear that one may be dead and at least one doesn't have records, what about the other two?131.96.70.158 18:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish Veterans 

message: Morning All
There could be a problem with this veteran, my understanding is that Romania was officially out of the war by 7th May 1918 (and was pretty much occupied and out of the actual fighting, by the end of 1917), this raises a couple of possible problems: 1, The interval between his 15th birthday and the signing of the peace treaty is narrow. 2, Would the occupying powers have let a vanquished opponent to continue recruiting into their armed forces? I am not saying this entry is incorrect, I just think it may need a bit of further info.SRwiki 09:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another possible reading of the weblink above is that the enemy actually being fought here is the pro-German government of Alexandru Marghiloman, who as far as I can tell was the leader sitting in Bucharest. I know that Romania re-declared war on Germany on 8th November, but where there any German soldiers in the vicinity to fight? or are the enemy troops referred to actually Romanian? Just a thought SRwiki 13:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romanian Veteran 

message: Morning All, There are a few unresolved issues floating round on this page, so can I propose a vote on the following: 
1, The anonymous French Veterans are moved to the unverified section.
:Yes-Rye1967 18:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes- 15:18,14 December 2006 
Just for clarification, here is some information on the French WWI veterans:
We (the 2 discovers of the two last French "poilus") hope that french governement celebrate the dead of the wrong last French WWI !
 
An d after we will release the name of the one or two leaving "poilus" !
 
Just to put on the face of the journalist and the governement their incompétences !
 
Note that lhe youngest is just 106 YO ans have a lot of chance to be the last (but not the official last) hihihihihihi !
Again, this came from the persons that discovered Rene Riffaud and Louis Legaurnadie.  Because the French media and national veterans organization failed to give credit, they are now withholding the last two names.  I know for a fact that Rene Riffaud was mentioned long before the French government took credit.
Subject: 2 French WWI véterans Forgotten 
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 11 
bart.versieck@scarlet.be, "Robert Young" <ryoung122@yahoo.com> 
9               René    Riffaud M               106    
 
That's correct, I knew about it Nov 15, 2005 (so did Bart Versieck).  Yet when did the French government find out?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4771974.stm
March 2006!
Now, with the researchers in dispute with the French government over source crediting, I do feel that there really are more veterans.  However, if you want to do "unverified" as a compromise, be my guest.  But don't be surprised when/if more French WWI veterans come to light.  Looking at the French list, where are all the 1899/1900/1901 veterans?  Clearly, there are more...→ R Young {yakłtalk} 09:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: But why not movement to the "WWI Era veterans" list instead? Extremely sexy 00:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes-Rye1967 18:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think 1,2,3,4 are great ideas. PershinBoy 01:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think of my proposal? Extremely sexy 01:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a possibility, and if he finally remains on the list, this is where I think he will end up. but I still feel this Romanian needs verifying, Under the treaty of Bucharest 1918, the Romanian army was largely demobilised. I just find it hard to believe under the circumstances, that they would be recruiting anyone, let alone 15 year old boys (I feel that any claims to having been a child soldier, need to be treated with care). Once again I am not saying it's impossible, but the more I read into this issue the less likely it looks. It would be very helpful if whoever put this candidate on the list would get involved with this discussion citing the evidence But I agree in the case of this Romanian we need to have a multi choice: A. stay where he is, B. Unverified, C. WW1 era, D. Delete SRwiki 07:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You make some fair points here, I hadn't realised that the war ended so messily on this front, but I am still wondering who was fighting who and why. Romania (surrendered May 1918) was sandwiched between Bulgaria (surrendered Sept 1918) and Austro Hungary (surrendered Oct 1918)so I would assume they where fighting each other, but on a technicality would this count as being part of World War 1, as all of these combatants where out of it by then, or is it some local, related, or near contemporaneous conflict? (I admit this is propably splitting hairs, but given the Balkans long history of kicking lumps out of each other, it is not an entirely ridiculous argument) Any way I agree with you that there is enough doubt around this issue to not have a straight deletion, but this candidate still needs some serious scrutiny. SRwiki 10:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some things we need to decide? 

message: Does anyone know anything about a Mr. George Francis of Sacramento, CA, who turned 110 this year?  Is it possible he served in WWI?  He's old enough to have been drafted.
He may well be a veteran but, we need to be careful about making any claims on the basis of age. I have done a little bit of digging, and acording to the 1910 US census there where 5.5 million men aged 18-20 in the USA, so it is a reasonable guess to say there was at least 10-15 million in the draftable age group (If anything this is probably an underestimate) According to my atlas of world history, the USA mobilised about 3.8 million people, and it is in the nature of warfare that these would be overwhelmingly male. So this means that at best, any currently surviving male in the age group has a 1 in 3 chance of being a vet. Whilst I am no expert on this, my hunch is that there are very, very few native born vets still awaiting discovery in the US, as I believe the US keeps pretty good records of this sort of thing. SRwiki 08:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: George Francis

message: Just to let you know, the family of Moses Hardy informed me that he died this morning. This is confirmed.  Be my guest to update.
I hope the media will run the story...Mr Hardy was the last African-American veteran of WWI and oldest living combat veteran...he was also the oldest man in the U.S. (unless you count Puerto Rico).  It seems we've lost quite a bit of the "supercentenarian towers"...George Johnson, 112; Maurice Floquet, 111; Ernest Pusey, 111; and now Moses Hardy, 113...
Sadly,
Robert Young
→ R Young {yakłtalk} 04:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, dear friend. Extremely sexy 15:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moses Hardy 1893-2006

message: http://www.sptimes.com/2006/12/14/State/At_107___his_life_foc.shtml
→ R Young {yakłtalk} 01:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Another U.S. WWI claim emerges

message: Are you disappointed, MS Redpepper, that two more German WWI vets emerged? So much for your predictions of all dead by the end of 2006.
It stands to reason that the news media tends to notice "oldest" people at 106 or 107.  Therefore, as the Moses Hardy-Ernest Pusey-Maurice Floquet cases pass on (extreme outliers), the last crop of green, once 18-year-old recruits is emerging.  So Germany is back to nine cases.  The UK has '4' but if you add 3 in Australia, one in Canada, and possibly Violet Bolaise, that's 9 as well.  Rest assured, France has at least 9 whether you chose to downgrade or not. → R Young {yakłtalk} 18:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Morning All, when I proposed that we decie a few things, I suggested a cut off date for discussion of end of December, Currently it appears as though moving the anonymous French and the Romanian Vet onto the unverified list is relatively uncontroversial, No-one has spoken up for Orin Peterson to remain on the WW1 vets list as opposed to WW1 era.
My next question is what evidence do we have for these two new German vets? There is something floating round in the back of mind, that whatever official body in Germany that is responsible for this, does not have very good records from WW1, so I am just wondering how new German vets get verified - can anyone enlighten me? Thanks SRwiki 08:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: We discussed this ad nauseam back in June and July. Please see above under the heading "Definition of 'veteran', who is included? Call for Votes."  Frankwomble 01:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to say I strongly disagree with having such a firm cut-off date for World War I era veterans - reason being, the US Forces were serving in Siberia as a result of their World War I era deployment into 1921, were they not? I think its fair to say that any US veteran who did not serve during World War I, but was deployed to Siberia during 1918/19/20 can fairly claim to be a World War I era veteran. - and as such should be retained on that portion of the list if that is a verifiable claim. jkm 09:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And that is entirely POV.  I'd go with what the nations define themselves as being official.  RGTraynor 11:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is POV - of course - but (as pointed out immediately below), the POV of the US Military! If the POV of the US Military is to be ignored (as you are suggesting) just what POV does carry any weight when determining the Veteran claims of US servicemen and, for that matter, women? In fact, it would seem that there is no acceptable POV out there to rely on in that case - so how on Earth can this list be constructed at all? jkm 16:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

text: It's not POV. As far as US veterans are concerned, those who deployed as part of American Expeditionary Forces Siberia are WWI veterans. Extract from U.S. Army Regulation 600-8-22, Military Awards, dated 25 February 1995. Paragraph 5–18. World War I Victory Medal a. The World War I Victory Medal was established by War Department General Orders 48, 1919. The medal is awarded for service between 6 April 1917 and 11 November 1918 or with either of the following expeditions: (1) American Expeditionary Forces in European Russia between 12 November 1918 and 5 August 1919. (2) American Expeditionary Forces Siberia between 23 November 1918 and 1 April 1920. Frankwomble 20:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two New German WWI Veterans

message: Don't just delete a veteran with no explanation. Give a reason for the deletion.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 20:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I also added him to this year's deceased World War I Veterans list, but I didn't know his exact date of death at the time, hence. Extremely sexy 21:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry: "last year's list", but his death has only recently been known. Extremely sexy 14:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hans Klöpper

message: A while back, a poster here (I forget the name) attacked me for the "vandalism" of removing Stephen Butcher's name, from the living veterans list, even though he was deceased (and I had seen a local newspaper's obituarys section) and demanded proof.
Aside from confirmation from Dennis Goodwin, the UK veterans "guru" as it were, then I repeat below what is held at the London Births, Marriages & Deaths Index for 2005.
Stephen Graham Butcher b. 2 Jan 1904 d. Dec 2005, Portsmouth. (volume Bon-Col Deaths 2005 p 577, entry 4971e)
I hope that now satisfies as enough proof (as I can hardly make up all that information), and with the above information a death certificate can also be obtained should there be any need.
Very shortly, the online versions of these indexes will be updated for online verification as well.
Thanks,
Richard J —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.132.144.160 (talk) 17:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No: thank you, my dear friend. Extremely sexy 00:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stephen Butcher 

message: M165.234.180.59 19:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And so, I was right after all, because I had deleted him immediately, since there was no reference at all, and, moreover, it was indeed an addition by an anonymous user, not an established one, as claimed by Robert Young. Extremely sexy 00:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Matthew Engh 

message: #1 november 1901- 
#105 years old
#http://miastolublin.pl/?m=news&d=17&nr=6626
#Surviving veteran? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.30.161.111 (talk) 16:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Konstanty Jung

message: Can anyone backup his move to the 2007 deathlist and confirm his passing? I'd just like to know if it was done by a legit poster because there is no day of month or citation. I hope it is not the same person from the whole Matthew Engh nonsense. --Brianmccollum 15:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A poster on the Yahoo! Group Worlds_Oldest_People claims Rudlof Seim died on 09.01.2007 --Brianmccollum 16:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rudolf Seim 

message: Afternoon All
During an idle moment whilst pretending to work I Googled Gheorghe C. Panculescu and the following came up as a Wikipedia link:
General(r) Corp de Armata Gheorghe C. Panculescu(n.26 martie 1903-d.9ianuarie2007) decorat cu Ordinul Steaua Romaniei in grad de Mare Cavaler(1991) si multe ...
But the link doesn't seem to go anywhere
Unfortunately my knowledge of Romanian is non-existent, so I couldn't plough through the Roimanian branch of Wikipedia to track it any further. but it does rather look as though he may have died on the 9th Jan. Has any-one else come across anything to corroborate this? Thanks SRwiki 15:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But where is this particular link though? Extremely sexy 16:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Has Gheorghe C. Panculescu died? 

message: Mr Pierro passed away this morning, Feb 8 2007. This is confirmed.
Please update accordingly.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 15:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Antonio Pierro

message: The Canadian government recently announced (in reaction to an online petition) that when the last surviving Canadian WWI vet dies, he would be given a state funeral, as a way of honouring the memories and sacrifices of all the Canadians who fought in WWI. Should this be mentioned somewhere on the page, either in the header or in the Canada section right above that table? --Maelwys 16:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What if  Mr. Babcock ends up being the last?  He was born in Canada. Did his training in Canada. However, not only has he spent most of his life in the USA. He is a United States citizen.  Will this bother the Canadians? I Imagine he will wish to be buried in the USA. 209.240.206.209 11:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He served in the Canadian military during WWI, so he'd be honoured on behalf of all the members of Canada's WWI military, regardless of where he lives now. Anyway, I didn't bring this here to discuss if it was right or wrong, just whether or not we should mention it on this page. --Maelwys 13:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I say place it on there in a brief sentence. It's an interesting tidbit that regular viewers who come across the page aren't going to learn about otherwise.--Brianmccollum 15:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It is an interesting tidbit, but does not belong on the main page. If so, we could probably add another 50 or 60 more interesting  footnotes and so on. By the way, the three Canadian veterans say they are not interested in a state funeral. I guess they can be honored, but it sounds like all three want a private funeral... No it shouldn't be listed in the main section. 209.240.206.209 02:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last living/dying Canadian veteran 

message: Morning all. If you scroll back up to the Charles Brunier discussion, you will see that I have been sitting in a corner jabbering away to myself for a while now. I am now suggesting that Charles Bruniers WW1 service record is not proven, as the chronology and details of the French military action in Syria don't match up to WW1 service. So I am proposing to move him either to the WW1 era category, or my own preference to the not validated section. But as you know, I always sound out the opinions of my fellow Wikipedians, before doing anything, so fire away. But can we have a clean fight, and if any one has got solid evidence one way or the other, please put it on the table SRwiki 09:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles Brunier again 

message: Morning All
There is a fair amount of web-chatter in French regarding the death of Charles Brunier at the start of February, for instance there is an obituary at: http://chezmartine.canalblog.com/archives/2007/02/06/3918105.html dated 6th Feb. I have moved him to the 2007 deaths page. Thanks. SRwiki 08:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles Brunier has died