Talk:Arnold Potts

message: As the author of almost all of this article so far, I have used the term Kokoda Trail in preference to Track.  This is the term used by Potts in his letters to his wife, and is also the Battle Honour listed on the King's Colour for the 39th Bn, one of the Batallions that fought under Potts in the campaign. 
Others have seen fit to change it to Track on the basis that 'this is what the diggers I know call it' or 'Track is Australian English'.  The former does not stand up to either Potts' written words or the evidence provided by the 39th's colours.  The latter is a baseless neologism.  Accordingly, I have changed Track references back to Trail. RichardH (talk) 10:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Track or Trail 

message: Hello. Having recently read A Bastard of a Place by Peter Brune, I am moved to add some detail of Potts' leadership in the Kokoda campaign. I will draw on the existing WP article Kokoda Track Campaign and bring in some other material from Brune. Please let me know if in doing this I will duplicating anyone else's work in progress - obviously that would be pointless.
For what it's worth, it seems to me a lot of energy is wasted in the Track/Trail debate. It seems to me there is resentment over various historic US/Aus military cooperation issues, spilling over into a debate about semantics that is in itself unimportant. I will follow RichardH's lead on this article and call it the Trail. SpoolWhippets (talk) 09:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections from me, so long as its all referenced, of course. For the sake of balance, I'd like to see the section on the Bougainville campaign expanded also if possible.—AustralianRupert (talk) 11:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: When I have covered his time with the 21st in Kokoda I'll try to read up on Bougainville. I have a book by Peter Pinney written around 1990 that describes his experiences in Bougainville, I'll see if Potts appears in that. SpoolWhippets (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potts in Kokoda campaign 

message: I have left this in an unbalanced state, with the rest of the KT campaign Brigade Hill -> still to write. I will be returning to it in the next 24 hours.59.101.220.15 (talk) 21:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi, SpoolWhippets. Good work so far. In understand the dilemma with the naming. I also don't have a preferrence on the term "track" or "trail", but my military mind craves uniformity. My advice in this case is just to follow what the original creator preferred and use "Trail". The main link can be changed to "Kokoda Trail Campaign", as that actually redirects to "Kokoda Track Campaign", so it will still appear as a blue link. — AustralianRupert (talk) 01:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for tidying up after me. I will do as you suggest and go with Trail, when I do my next set of edits - got to dash just now.SpoolWhippets (talk) 06:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, now it is a Trail. I have written up to the Rabbits speech, and for now that is just a precis of what is on the main page. Still to do: Brune's account of the speech and its effects, contrasted with some reference to official denials.  Potts time in NT and more importantly, Bougainville - I have the Edgar book now.  (done) Then some tributes - there are glowing references throughout Brune but I will strive for balance. When I get a chance I will make a better wide map showing also the location of Buna/Gona and Milne Bay, and then a good clear map of the Kokoda trail localities mentioned. (done) That might also be useful for the main article - the Japanese maps there do not help the general reader much.SpoolWhippets (talk) 23:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kokoda expansion underway 

message: Can we please get some concensus here? In my opinion the ADF ribbon template at the bottom of the article is not used on biographies of military personnel. It is for branches of service, etc. This is particularly the case with personnel who did not serve in the ADF (it didn't exist as an entity until 1976). It is usual to include Military offices in a box at the bottom of a biography page, however (for example see William Bridgeford). ChoraPete was correct to remove it in my opinion, however, lets discuss it so we can have some concensus on the matter. Buzzzsherman, in your edit summary you indicate that you reverted for consistency, however, I've not seen any bios with this template on. Can you please point to any other biographies that it has been used on? Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO its inappropriate for several reasons, firstly it is not consistently used in military biographies and he wasn't even a member of the ADF (formed in 1976). So I think Rupert is spot on it this case. ChoraPete (talk) 02:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ADF ribbon template link 

message: I think the introduction may need rewording. Is it just me, or does this not comply with WP:NPOV:
His career was one of bravery, diligence and sustained high achievement. However, his place in history has largely been unacknowledged, due to his dismissal by General Sir Thomas Blamey
Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 18:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see your point, Gaia. It shouldn't be a major problem to reword. Perhaps something like this: "He had a distinguished career, however, arguably his place in history has been unacknowledged due his dismissal..." As I'm not the major contributor to the article, I would like to get SpoolWhippets' opinion, though. — AustralianRupert (talk) 12:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: There is a lot of very good material here but much of it is not about Potts but about events around him, several paragraphs don't even involve him at all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.216.0.151 (talk) 05:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  lack of focus