Talk:George Walton (Royal Navy officer)

Changes of 10 December 2012
I undid the changes made by a new editor. The changes made by him/here were made with the best of intentions, but were superfluous. Firstly, there is no need to qualify the Royal Navy as being "British" - see the opening sentence of the article by that name. Secondly, there is no need to add "England" after "Essex" in repsect of his birthplace. Wikipedia convention is to omit the country unless there is need to disambiguate things.

May I sugest that you look at WP:MOS and its sub-pages where you will see a catalogue of what is expected. Martinvl (talk) 14:23, 10 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I have again reverted. DO NOT REDO YOUR CHANGES UNTIL THERE IS CONSENSUS. It is part of WIkipedia policy that if a WP:BOLD change is reverted, then a discussion takes place until a consensus is reached.  If no consensus can be reached, the historically stable version remains.  In this case, the historically stable version is the version without the word "British".  Yes, I am aware that there are many other "Royal navies" in the world - my late father served in the Royal Netherlands Navy (or Koninklijke Marine) from January 1939 until November 1947.  When using the English language however, due to the pre-eminence of the [British] Royal Navy, the word "British" is not used - in much the same way that the words "United Kingdom" do not appear on Briitsh stamps. Martinvl (talk) 16:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * You seem keen on throwing Wikipedia rules around. Have you read WP:SHOUT? In particular the piece about the use of capital letters where it says they "are considered shouting and are virtually never appropriate". I will happily discuss whether assumptions that many readers will be unaware of should be qualified and explained more clearly, but I do not respond too well to being shouted at. Dainful (talk) 23:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)