Talk:List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients

message: Edmonton Bulletin during the war quoted letter from staff officer of 30th infantry Brigade, 10th Division, Mediterranean Expeditionary Force,  saying that Capt. C.Y. Baldwin of the same unit won a VC some time before being wounded at Gallipoli. (Ed. Bulletin, Jan. 18, 1916)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.208.33 (talk) 06:43, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captain C.Y. Baldwin, of the British Army, earned VC at Gallipoli? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients. 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/20120217203616/http://collectionscanada.ca/databases/cef/index-e.html to http://collectionscanada.ca/databases/cef/index-e.html
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) 22:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Estimates of how many Irish men fought in the First World War vary, but it is now generally accepted that around 200,000 soldiers from the island of Ireland served over the course of the war." http://www.iwm.org.uk/history/irelands-role-in-the-first-world-war
"37 Irish VCs in World War I" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irish_Victoria_Cross_recipients  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.171.80.247 (talk) 15:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Were are the Irish? 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus DrStrauss talk 19:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
 for the record, and because DrStrauss is currently ill and cant respond. I am against this move request being reopened. As a matter of procedure I would suggest waiting at least 6 weeks before opening a new move request on the same principle. British Great War Veterans would literally turn in their graves over this abysmal idea. If you want consistency then go and rename the Second World War articles. Per guidelines the title should reflect the English variant used by the recipients during their lives - 20th century British English. To even consider renaming this for 'consistency' is an affront to their honor, I seriously reject trying to reduce the mass killing of millions of people to a roman numeral, it should, and is, written out in full for a good reason. Obviously this reasoning does not apply to :British anti-invasion preparations of the Second World War, which could perhaps be considered on its own, however as a matter of procedure it would be advisable to wait before opening a new move request. Dysklyver 21:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 21 September 2017