Talk:Gerald Templer

Fair use rationale for Image:Templer time.jpg
Image:Templer time.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

No flags in infoboxes
MOS:FLAGS explicitly states: "Avoid flag icons in infoboxes. Generally, flag icons should not be used in infoboxes, even when there is a 'country', 'nationality' or equivalent field: they are unnecessarily distracting and give undue prominence to one field among many. Flag icons should only be inserted in infoboxes in those cases where they convey information in addition to the text. Flag icons are visually distracting in infoboxes and lead to unnecessary disputes when over-used. Examples of acceptable exceptions would be military battle infoboxes templates and infoboxes that include international competitions, such as FIFA World Cup or the Olympic Games. The guidelines for a number of common infoboxes (e.g. Template:Infobox company, Template:Infobox film, Template:Infobox person) explicitly prohibit the use of flag icons. The use of country-related flagicons and signal flags in infoboxes for ship articles and military conflicts is appropriate."

Additionally, this article is of a military person, not a military unit, but that is of no consequence. Where can and editor find info to support your claim (MOS:FLAGS is directed from WP:MOS)?


 * You'll note that MOS:FLAG says generally—it's advice, not the eleventh commandment. The use of flags in infoboxes of British military officers (including at least two FAs) is almost uniform and has been for longer than I've been on Wikipedia. I think one of the examples they give is Paul McCartney—his notability has very little to do with his nationality and so whatever prominence a flag give the nationality would be inappropriate, but nationality (or rather allegiance) is much more relevant to a military officer. Monty, for example, was the head of the British Army and would not have been so if he was, say, a French citizen. That particular part of the MoS wasn't written with military biographies in mind and they are (rightly) generally excepted from it. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:40, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Bullmoosebell. Thanks for your contribution. I don't think there is any need to look wider than MOS:FLAG and the exception contained therein. I believe it was written with military articles, including biographies, in mind. There are literally thousands of articles which follow this principle. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 18:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * (Replying to your note on my talk page) You're welcome. I also just noticed the advice in WP:MILMOS: When dealing with biographical infobox templates, the most common practice is to use flag icons to indicate allegiance or branch of service, but not place of birth or death. On an almost entirely unrelated note, you might be interested in this. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   19:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ranks
I think I managed to piece together how his rank varied over his career, but having it put into a list could make it clearer. If I read it right, he was promoted to Major General and Lieutenant General at least twice each, first temorarily, then later substantively? TLein (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi - You are correct about the ranks. But if you read WP:PROSE editors are encouraged to use good prose rather than lists. Best wishes, Dormskirk (talk) 21:02, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Right, checked few FA-class military officer articles, and apparently rank tables are no longer used. I recall seeing them before, but if we aim to fit them into the prose, that's the style we have chosen. But i think this article might need a bit of clear-up on the way this distinguished gentleman moved up and down the ranks. TLein (talk) 11:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Declined nobility?
Did Templer decline a life-peerage? Its a bit uncommon that a FM has no baroncy or vicountcy. --37.24.11.144 (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gerald Templer. 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/20071029133055/http://www.national-army-museum.ac.uk/research/templerss2.shtml to http://www.national-army-museum.ac.uk/research/templerss2.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120414230204/http://www.iseas.edu.sg/HSLee/HSL0126.pdf to http://www.iseas.edu.sg/HSLee/HSL0126.pdf

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) 19:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Photo caption - "A British soldier in Malay poses..."
The current caption of the photo in the "High Commissioner in Malaya" section says:

"A British soldier in Malay poses with the heads of two MNLA guerrillas."

However, the image shows a Royal Marine, as confirmed by the detailed media description. While a relatively minor update I think it is worth amending this, but would appreciate any thoughts either way on best practice in terms of captions and appropriate levels of detail. BH530481 (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)