Talk:Victoria Cross/Archive 1

Material
Removed:
 * The medal is made from gunmetal, the metal being taken from Russian guns captured during the Crimean War.

because it contradicts the 1st para about chinese cannons. Could someone confirm which it is? -- Tarquin


 * The first para reads to me like the guns in question were made in China, but were being used by the Russians at the time they were captured. The Chinese bit is a new one on me (though it may be correct), but it's certainly true the guns were Russian and captured at Sebastopol during the Crimean war. --Camembert

Arg. it's late at night here, I need to read more carefully. The bit I removed doesn't contradict, but the bit in the first paragraph has more information. Still, it was a Good Thing to remove duplication *yawn* -- Tarquin

Uh... Someone may want to actually look at the sites referenced at the bottom of this article, specifically the first paragraph of :). -- nknight 16:42 7 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * (Not that it matters much, but those links weren't there when this discussion happened some months ago. --Camembert)

--

Just out of curiousity, how big were the cannons? I mean, they've gotten more than a thousand crosses out of them. What's going to happen when they run out of the bronze?
 * Well the bronze they got left should be enough for 50 or so medals (if I remember correctly from the Jeremy Clarkson VC documentary), and with the current rate of awards that'll last a long time. Abel29a 12:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

-- Is it correct to say that the crosses are in the shape of a "Maltese Cross" doesn't that have to have 8 points?

Is the bronze specifically from the cascabels? Rich Farmbrough 09:53, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) --

The article says that the NZVC is made of the original gunmetal where as the Canadian and Australian versions are not. The source it quotes doesn't even mention Australia. The Australian VC is indeed made of the gunmetal, as stated here: http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/honours/awards/medals/victoria_cross.cfm I'm not familiar with how to edit articles and add sources and such, but if somebody could correct this it would be appreciated. 59.101.167.159 04:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have amended the article accordingly, thankyou for the information!Woodym555 07:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

MARCH 31 2005
Someone told me to post here? WHtas the prob?

Why statement was removed
I removed "the Victoria Cross is one of the only awards that can never be revoked" because it is erroneous (and was ungrammatical as well). See here and here for starters. Corbett's VC was revoked and his name was erased from the Victoria Cross Register by Royal Warrant and his VC pension was terminated.Moriori 00:07, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC).

The rules were later changed, and VCs restored.Richard75 23:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Valour in face of the enemy?

 * Since the VC is awarded for acts of valour "in the face of the enemy", it is thought by some that the changing nature of warfare will result in few VCs being awarded.

Hmm. I'd always thought this, too - but there's a note on the entry for Campbell Mellis Douglas (a Canadian surgeon, award made way back in 1867), that:


 * VC not awarded for bravery in action against the enemy, but for bravery at sea in saving life in storm off Andaman Islands.

I'm curious if anyone has information to reconcile these; it looks like the situation can be interpreted as "in the face of the enemy" if you squint a bit, but I was wondering if there was a more sensible explanation.


 * I think the qualification may have changed over time. It's currently "in the face of the enemy" - in Iraq Pte Johnson Beharry got a VC, while Tpr Christopher Finney only got a George Cross for equally valorous action because his action was "in the face of American friendly fire". -- Arwel 22:56, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * There's a difference? Markb 14:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There's no "only" about it. VC and GC are of equal status. Vilĉjo 22:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to pose a question, how is it possible that the bravery of Noor Inayat Khan, of Violette Szabo and of Odette Sansom is NOT considered to be "in the face of the enemy"? If you were to ask me, I'd say that it was prolonged bravery in the face of the enemy and they deserve a VC Acmthompson 13:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Because they weren't (generally) fighting the enemy face to face. They were working to undermine the enemy. Violette's GC wasn't awarded for her final battle (which has since been disputed) but for all the work she did in France and how she stood up to the torture and questioning -- SteveCrook 21:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Images from Victoria Cross Reference Site
Images throughout the VC recipients pages use images "with permission" from the Victoria Cross Reference site, and need their license information made more explicit. Is it non-commercial only? Is it for Wikipedia only? etc. See Image_copyright_tags. 119 06:41, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Image:VCJamesWilliamAdamsGrave.jpg
 * Image:VCJamesWilliamAdams.jpg
 * Image:VCHaroldAckroydGrave.jpg
 * Image:VCFilipKonowalGrave.jpg
 * Image:VCFilipKonowal.jpg
 * Image:VCAdamsJamesWilliamsGrave.jpg
 * Image:VCAbrahamActon.jpg

casting??

 * All VCs are cast from the bronze of two Chinese cannon that were reputedly...

I remember seeing a BBC program about the VC where the woman who makes the crosses said that they don't re-cast it and so working with the metal is very hard. From the statement in the article it seems to me to suggest that the bronze is melted and then cast as a cross, which is not true. I haven't changed the article, because I am not sure of what to write, I hope a better informed member of wikipedia will look into it. --145.94.41.95 20:24, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * IIRC, it's actually from Russian cannons, but I'll check my sources and post them here. The metal itself is actually recast, and the remaining ingot has enough material for about eighty more VCs. --Deathphoenix 20:32, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The lady who makes the crosses herself said that the metal is not recast, it was on the BBC about a year ago...--145.94.41.95 22:31, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * This is the website of the people who actually make the crosses, Hancock's of London . They state quite clearly that the VCs are cast using sand filled moulds, unlike most other medals which are die cast (i.e. stamped or struck). It would have been the phrase "die cast" that the woman would have been referring to. Also to clarify, the cannons were manufactured in China (this is what Hancock's say so and surely they must be a reliable source) and presumably had the ornamentation typical of Chinese cannons (dragons etc..). Were they captured from the Russians at Sebastapol? Or is this a different legend? I don't know.Jooler 17:04, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * There are various sites that say (or quote from a source that says) - "For a short period during the 1914-18 war, some gun-metal from Chinese guns captured during the Boxer Rebellion was used." - but Hancock's definitely say that - "In fact, the metal is of Chinese origin and not Russian as if often stated." - I am guessing or theorizing the following -


 * 1) The Russians bought or captured some guns from the Chinese
 * 2) These guns were used by the Russians at Sevastapol, where they were captured by the British
 * 3) These guns were initially used to make the medals
 * 4) During the First World War they were churning out so many medals that they started using some metal from guns captured by the British from the Chinese during the Boxer Rebellion because they would have been of the same kind of metal as the original guns.
 * 5) After WWI they went back to using the guns captured from the Russians.
 * Jooler 17:45, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * BTW, "check my sources" isn't something extraordinary, it's just checking out web sites. Anyway, here's some information from the Imperial War Museum website


 * What is the VC made of?
 * All VCs are made from bronze. The metal comes from melted down breeches of guns captured from the Russians at Sebastopol in the Crimea. The rough cast Crosses are then individually hand finished; each is therefore unique. The remaining ingot of bronze, believed to be sufficient for a further 80 Crosses, is held by the Ministry of Defence.


 * --Deathphoenix 23:44, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Do you agree then that the five points I laid out are probably correct? Jooler 09:58, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree that the first three points you laid out are probably correct, but I admit that I didn't know about 4 & 5. I didn't know they switched metals during WWI. --Deathphoenix 14:15, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * What will happen once they run out of the cannon? What would the medals be made of then? Kaiser Matias 02:22 June 2 2005 (UTC)


 * With only twelve VCs having been awarded since the end of World War II they've still got a few years yet to sort this out (roughly 400 if awards are made at the same rate as they have been for the last 60 years). Lisiate 01:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Previous VC recipient
The entry concerning the VC recipient previous to Pvt. Beharry may not be accurate. I had read of a VC being awarded to an SAS RSM for service in Afghanistan in 2002.

http://static.highbeam.com/s/scotlandonsundayedinburghscotland/march242002/sassoldierwinsvcforheroisminafghanistan/

As the article above notes, it is illegal under British law to disclose the name of a member of the SAS. It has occurred to me that the ommission of the above citation may be due to discretion rather than lack of knowledge. balloo 23:05, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Whilst it is sort-of possible that the MoD might award a decoration to someone who they don't name, the MoD's press release explicitly states this is the first since the Falklands, and gives the number awarded since WWII - all of those can be attatched to names. For this story to be true they'd have to have pretended it wasn't awarded rather than just "to an undisclosed soldier". I have my doubts about them ever doing even that, but regardles...


 * My reading is that there was some talk of awarding the medal to this guy, but that it was never actually awarded - note the future tense in the article you quote. Shimgray 23:26, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm an American, living in Canada, but I've served overseas with British Army detachments. Their way of doing things has its own internal logic. If an SAS RSM were to be awarded a decoration would the event ever be made publicly known? balloo 00:30, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I can't say I'm speaking from a great position of knowledge here, but I honestly don't think they'd keep it secret. Or, more accurately - I don't think they'd award a VC they wouldn't later identify. It just doesn't seem to gel with the way they work, the way these are reported when they do get awarded. (That, and the number of times I've seen memoirs with comments about "had this been public at the time...")


 * As I understand it - although checking the law on the matter could prove surprising, these things are pretty baroque - they could choose to award any medal and merely not tell anyone; it wouldn't surprise me if this has been done, either not publicising the award or just not giving a reason. However, the latter would be both embarrassing for the MoD and look fairly silly in the case of something as high profile as the VC - as well as not being very effective, since it's not like there's very many other groups it might have been awarded to. The occasionally - ah - legally dubious practices used by the SAS (there's been some highly contentious operations over the years, some in Ulster) means, as well, that not identifying what it was being awarded for could well backfire.


 * Also note that things like "not identifying members of the SAS" are a bit odd; there's a good argument it's mainly done to preserve a mystique - this is the government that pretended for fifty years it didn't have an intelligence service... But do recall that every member of the SAS has entered through secondment, is a soldier of several years experience, and (I believe) often returns to the regular army after their service. As such, you could easily name them - "Sergeant John Smith, Grenadier Guards, was awarded the VC for actions in Afghanistan (...)" - without identifying them as SAS, just being a bit vague over which unit they were with at the time. Certainly the MoD hasn't been averse to publicising details of SAS operations when it chooses - the Sierra Leone rescue was all over the papers in great detail the next day, if memory serves.


 * I hope that made sense, I think I rambled a little - anyway, no matter how plausible it is, I'd be loathe to change the article on the basis of one comment in a newspaper, about an event that hadn't happened at the time of writing... Shimgray 02:45, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * (Oh - Interestingly, there is an American case, of the Medal of Honor having been kept secret - Cpl. Hiroshi Miyamura was awarded it for an action in Korea that led him to be taken prisoner; they didn't announce it for two years - until he was released - because of fears of Chinese retaliation against him. Not the same concept, but an interesting footnote nonetheless.)


 * Having read over the Scotland on Sunday article again, it seems to be phrased as though they intended to announce the VC, but not name the recipient. This certainly didn't happen... I think we can safely disregard it.


 * Aha! From the Express, in 2003:


 * Defence chiefs want to speed the process after a row blew up following the war in Afghanistan over whether two members of the SAS should have been given VCs for their exploits during the raid on Osama Bin Laden's mountain bolthole of Tora Bora. The soldiers eventually won the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross, the next combat medal down from the VC.


 * and the Telegraph mentions them:


 * ...two SAS soldiers who took part in an attack on the al-Qa'eda cave complex also in Afghanistan in November 2001. One led the main attack on the heavily defended caves near Kandahar while the other directed aerial fire at the caves, putting his life at extreme risk by waiting until the last possible moment to bring down fire.


 * Going further back to March 2002, quite a few papers reported it - the Scotsman gives some details:


 * Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, is believed to have wanted the man's name to be published to create a "feel good" factor around the British presence in Afghanistan. However, he reluctantly agreed the man's identity and the details of his gallantry would not appear in the London Gazette when the honour is officially announced. (...) The award of the VC is due to be confirmed at next month's meeting of the Central Gallantry Awards Committee


 * This is fairly representative of the reporting at the time; presumably sometime in April it got changed to the CGC. Hope that clears it up... Shimgray 03:02, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Further... from an article on the actual awarding:


 * None of the members of the SAS, SBS, or the RAF's 7 and 47 Sqns is named in today's announcement, which gives details of all awards to ordinary servicemen and women before ending with an anonymous list of "other honours awarded" to cover the special forces. (Telegraph, October 2002)


 * So it seems they do identify the decorations given, but don't give names for them. That clears that question up, at least. Shimgray 03:15, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

85 Left?
There has been some reverting back and forth between B1link82 and various other people in this article regarding the statement "There is only enough of the metal left to create 85 more medals." This has been reverted as vandalism several times, but I suspect that it's a good faith edit regardless of if its right or not. B1link82 says that it's from the BBC website, and I've found it at http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A665192. Since this is H2G2, this is also written by the public like Wikipedia and should not be used as a primary source. Does anyone else know anything about this? - RedWordSmith 23:18, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah I lost you after the link you gave.

H2G2?

[above is B1link82]
 * H2G2. - RedWordSmith 23:27, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)


 * h2g2 is a publicly-written "guide to everything" (similar in concept to Wikipedia) hosted by the BBC; they don't exert much editorial control over it. As such, it's not an automatically reliable source - it ought to be treated in much the same way as Wikipedia as far as evidence goes, in that it's reasonably reliable but a lot of minor details probably won't have been checked by anyone.


 * However, the ~85 figure is cited by, actually part of the BBC and presumably with their editorial oversight, so... Shimgray 23:29, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

ok well i guess its real, i saw it on BBC News site as well. - b1link82

The Western Front Association VC facts & figures article has the 85 figure. Not sure when the article was written but I consider the WFA are pretty reliable source. As they point out, the medals are cast from the terminal bosses of two cannon so if they run out, they can always use the barrels themselves. Geoff/Gsl 23:42, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * The following is an excerpt from an earlier post I made to this talk page:


 * Here's some information from the Imperial War Museum website


 * What is the VC made of?


 * All VCs are made from bronze. The metal comes from melted down breeches of guns captured from the Russians at Sebastopol in the Crimea. The rough cast Crosses are then individually hand finished; each is therefore unique. The remaining ingot of bronze, believed to be sufficient for a further 80 Crosses, is held by the Ministry of Defence.
 * --Deathphoenix 02:07, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

IT IS 85 LEFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --B1link82 20:50, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Which is the same approximate amount. I'm not about to get into an argument over whether it is 80 or 85 when the source states it as an approximation (hence the word believed). The point is, the remaining ingot of bronze is believed to have enough material for a further 80 or so Crosses. If you want to put 85, be my guest and go right ahead. --Deathphoenix 01:08, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Facts from the MOD http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/ophons05/vcfactsht.htm Jooler 08:54, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm sure I saw a docu a few years ago that showed that Hancocks' had a tray VCs that has been cast but not finished for use with future recipeients. I think they had about 15 medals. So the true figure of remaining medals could be 100 or so. Jooler 09:15, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Good point. I think having the extra medals is separate from the ingot, but should be mentioned together. In other words, we have about 15 Crosses already made, and an ingot enough for a further 80 or so Crosses. --Deathphoenix 14:39, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I can't find the site now, but earlier I read that they make batches of 12 at a time and that the last time a batch was made was in something like 1959. Somewhere else it sais that they replace lost or stolen medals from time to time and that they currently (probably before the latest issue) have seven in storage. Jooler 14:50, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * [[Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg|thumb]]I am wondering, are the miniature Victoria Crosses made from the same cannon bronze that the large ones are made from. This question arose when I was looking at this photo of Smokey Smith Dowew 19:42, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Valour Road
I was thinking of adding a small bit about Valour Road in Winnipeg, MB, Canada. Three Victoria Cross winners all lived on Pine Street in Winnipeg. It was later named to Valour Road in their honour. It's believed to be the only street in the world that have had three Victoria Cross winners. I think that could be worth noting. What do people think?

sounds interesting but not much to do with the VC though - b1link82


 * Go ahead. It's a relevant subject. -- Necrothesp 08:26, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. Doesn't it have it's own article yet? DJ Clayworth 13:53, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Total Awarded
Has the figure of total VCs awarded been updated since Beharry's award? Lisiate 20:30, 24 May 2005 (UTC)


 * There were a big slew of edits then; I don't think all the total figures were updated at the same time, but they did all get updated within a day or two. Shimgray 12:15, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Theif of the VC
Given the black market value of the VC they are often targeted by theives. I have created a section for this. Dowew 03:07, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Forking
Canada created their own VC award, but it was awarded to nobody yet. It can be seen at http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/dhh/honours_awards/engraph/honour_awards_e.asp?cat=3&Q_ID=1.Zscout370 (Sound Off) 19:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

New Photo
Here is a new photo I have found: http://www.mod.uk/img/medals/vc_obv_hr.jpg. Enjoy. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:11, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Coal minors vc
Anybody know anything about the existence of this medal ?

Dowew 00:49, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I suspect this is the Edward Medal for industrial bravery, which was later superseded by the George Cross. -- Necrothesp 02:03, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Michael Ashcroft
Do you think the article should mention the trivia that Michael Ashcroft is beleived to own about 100 VC's ? Dowew 17:12, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, he's a significant player when medals come up for auction, so I've created an "Unofficial collections" section for it. -- Arwel (talk) 18:16, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Proposed New Zealand VC
Has New Zealand adopted its own VC ? I have been reading this report about the New Zealand Honour system and it said that someone had suggested replacing British Honours with a four level Victoria Cross system, which the author describes as "bizarre". From the looks of the official page of the New Zealand Honour System, NZ, like Australia and Canada has created its own VC. Dowew 05:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * well, according the this page New Zealand has "created" its own VC, although this looks to only be an administrative change. Dowew 00:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * NZ now has The Victoria Cross for New Zealand .."instituted in 1999 to replace the British Victoria Cross for future awards to New Zealand military personnel.'' Brian | (Talk) 05:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

New web resources on the VC
The National Archives has just released a variety of web resources relating to the VC. This includes images of the original Royal Warrant, and a searchable register of (most of) the awards

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/victoriacross.asp

Since I work for the National Archives, I think it better to leave it up to others as to how to reference this material from Wikipedia.

David Underdown 11:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Recommended for the VC by the enemy
Lieutenant-Commander Gerard Broadmead Roope was also awarded the VC after the recommendation from the captain of the German cruiser Admiral Hipper so Lloyd Allan Trigg wasn't the only one who got a VC that way, right? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.234.137.41 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * You're right. I'll update the article accordingly. --Deathphoenix 19:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And I have updated it even further. There is an important point here. Had the German u-boat captain not recommended Trigg be decorated, he would never have been decorated because no-one else could know about the action. But, had the German ship's captain not recommended Broadmead Roope be decorated, he would probably have still been decorated.  Trigg got the VC on evidence given solely by the enemy, but there were many survivors from Broadmead Roope's vessel to corroborate the events. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Moriori (talk &bull; contribs) . (Oops, sorry. Moriori 19:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC))
 * I suspected as much. Excellent rewording. :-) --Deathphoenix ʕ 18:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Who is This?
Currently on ebay, there is a sepia photograph of a soldier. which states that the soldier is wearing The Indian Mutiny Medal, The Khedive Star and the Victoria Cross. Just out of curiosity, are there any sleuths out there who can identify this soldier, by uniform rank or whatever? I am sure there are.I have not reproduced the photo in case I breach rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funnybone (talk • contribs)

Could be tricky - there were a lot of VCs awarded in the mutiny - 20+ at the relief of Lucknow alone. You'd have more luck if you could identify his unit. Lisiate 22:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Australian vs Canadian stuff
If you want to add Australian stuff, don't delete the Canadian stuff. It is unnecessary. Ekrub-ntyh 00:41, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Stamp image
I wonder if it would be possible to put up a higher resolution image of the Canadian stamp, allowing the words "Pro Valore" to be more easily seen. Maybe whoever put the image in could do that. Biff Loman 19:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

VC can't be removed.
Unlike almost any other award (GC perhaps?) even knighthoods the order is not revoked irrespective of the subsequent actions of the holder. I think perhaps this should be included. 

""The King feels so strongly that, no matter the crime committed by anyone on whom the VC has been conferred, the decoration should not be forfeited. Even were a VC to be sentenced to be hanged for murder, he should be allowed to wear the VC on the scaffold". Alci12 18:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It's already noted in the section "Forfeited VCs". -- Arwel (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It is now I read directly - I had searched for 'stripped' and the quote via my editing tool which didn't pick the entry up. I still think however the actual quote is better than a paraphrasing Alci12 23:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

As a serving member of the Australia Army. In the Department of Defence, Ceremonial Manual Volume One Dated 2003, Annex B to Chapter 13 Para 4 States that; Victoria Cross winners, unless they are serving commissioned officers in the armed forces are not saluted

Saluting
Please read paragraph above.

if someone earns the victoria cross does that meant that someone with a high rank has to salute them before they salute the rank like the polish Virtuti Militari.Corustar 10:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not really 'has to' - but it is the custom and tradition that even a general will initiate a salute to a VC wearer

Thank you for your reply ive been waiting awhile for one, i thought it odd that theres no mention of saluting when both the medal of honour and virtuti militari have it as a rule/custom.Corustar 21:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I believe that this is quite a significant fact that should be included in the article. Whilst the writer above (no name) says that they don't have to, actually they do. Officers have been known in the past to ask why a VC awarded soldier has not saluted them, only for that soldier to say "You need to salute this.." and points to his chest!
 * The reason behind the salute is that when Queen Victoria (whom the Cross is named after)awarded the first recipients, the Prince Consort saluted weach recipient with grave and respectful coutesy.
 * Also as stated on the wikipedia article Salute -- "Custom, however, does dictate that a general should salute a private if the private has the Medal of Honor, the same convention applies in the United Kingdom to holders of the Victoria Cross and in the Netherlands to holders of the Military Willems Order"(Jezarnold 16:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC))


 * If you can find a source for it then go on and add it.


 * X damr talk 16:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Rules for saluting are different in different countries. I believe the Americans are even allowed to salute if they aren't in full uniform (complete with cap) -- SteveCrook 21:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Why is the section on saluting subtitled Order of Preference? I would have thought that 'Order of Preference' would refer to the VC being awarded first, before any other title like a knighthood, and that it is always the first medal in a row of them, or that the letters VC always come first in a postnomial -- SteveCrook 15:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Alfred John Shout
It is being reported on Australian Television that the VC awarded to Alfred John Shout has been sold at auction for $A1,000,000 on 24th July 2006. Gnangarra 14:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Is there a news article that you could provide a link to? --Deathphoenix ʕ 15:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry I just caught the story on Channel 10 Television News tonight(23:00 24/7 gmt+8), when I find a link that useable as a reference I'll add. Should be in the print media and associated netsites tomorrow, just warning editors to keep an eye out for information. Gnangarra 15:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * A link The Age, Australia Gallipoli VC medal sets auction record. Gnangarra 15:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Auction house Bonhams and Goodman has yet update there net page. suggest waiting for that and use as the reference for the article.
 * Great, thanks. When the auction house has a link, that'll be good, but your news article link is good enough as a source. --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

GA Re-Review and In-line citations
Note: This article has a very small number of in-line citations for an article of its size and currently may not pass criteria 2b. Members of the WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. --- The Bethling (Talk) 23:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

VC Development
Cpl Bryan Budd is speculated to be awarded a postumous VC. My source is The Sun newspaper. Yes I know they aren`t the most reliable authority on the matter, but it does reference military authorities. Any comments ?
 * Do you have a link to that source? Moriori 20:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Nope, but it shouldn`t be hard to get hold of yesterdays Sun newspaper.


 * As its still speculation and no confirmation until next year suggest that maybe it shouldnt be part of the article yet, previous speculation of a VC award for a UK servicemen was later didnt result in the commendation. Gnangarra 13:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Several commendations have been made in Afghanistan: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/28/nmedals28.xml
 * However an award for Bryan Budd is expected today, according to the Telegraph who (along with the Times) are quite likely to know these things: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/14/nvc14.xml Hakluyt bean 03:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Forfeitures
The section on forfertuires is not particularly clear. It says that those 8 who were stripped of their medals have been returned to official lists. I assume this means they are still considered awardees of the medal? Some of their medals are still displayed. All of them died before the 1920s except one in 1921 so I assume the issue of pensions never came up. Were attempts made to return the medals to their families? Also, in most of the pages for those who forfeited their medals, it's not made clear that the forfeiture has been reversed (assuming my understanding is correct). Nil Einne 08:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Dead link
Reference 10, (http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/08/23/victoria040823.html) referenced in the theft section gives a 404 error.--82.152.220.87 21:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Colour of ribbon
The colour of the ribbon is described as red in the text and crimson in the caption to the picture. Neither is correct. I believe it is officially described as "claret" and is a quite a different colour to both the red and the purple that appears in other British medals. Can anyone back this up? GavinTillman 18:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * According to the 1856 Warrant:


 * ...the Cross shall be suspended from the left breast, by a blue riband for the Navy, and by a red riband for the Army.


 * Clearly not too helpful. On the other hand, literature on the topic habitually describes the ribbon as being crimson.  Most of these books seem to treat the Warrant's use of 'red' as an oddity.  I'm not aware of any other official description, one varying from the terms of the Warrant.


 * X damr talk 00:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The original ribbons were Red for Army and Blue for Navy, however after the first world war because there were so many awards (626 awards) a uni-ribbon was given out instead (the current crimson/claret colour) as a mixture between red and dark blue. [Pagren 21/06/2007]

Not the last surviving VC
I presume that the following is the last surviving VC of WW1... somebody like to correct it? In August 2005, Ernest Alvia ("Smokey") Smith, Canada's last surviving VC —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Purple Aubergine (talk • contribs) 21:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC).


 * No, Smith's article makes it clear that he won his VC in WW2. It's not difficult to parse In August 2005, Ernest Alvia ("Smokey") Smith, Canada's last surviving VC as meaning that Smith was the last Canadian alive who had won the VC – since he passed on, there are no living Canadians who have won the VC. -- Arwel (talk) 22:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

GA review
I am posting this article for GA review. Concerns will be noted there. IvoShandor 08:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Link to discussion. IvoShandor 08:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Per the above review, there seems to be very little chance of this article retaining GA status in its present state. I suggest that we have a root and branch rewrite.  I'm hoping (other commitments allowing) to rewrite some of the material on the Warrant/technical side over the next day or so.


 *  X damr  talk 11:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Amazing in "Other"
Re the latest edit, removing the word "amazing". The editor says it's not for us to use such a word in this context, but says it's ok to put it back in if references are cited. I'd argue that no matter how many times this may appear in print or online, it should not go in. You could find thousand of references saying that "George W Bush is the best president America has ever had", but that wouldn't justify us saying so. The photo certainly seems to be unique in capturing the very moment that led to a VC being awarded - and that would be perfectly OK to state. But whether or not it's amazing is inherently POV. JackofOz 01:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

GA review
In a 6 to 0 decision in WP:GA/R, this article has been delisted, for a myriad of concerns mostly in the nomination itself which was agreed on by most people. Review archived here: Good article review/Archive 17. Homestarmy 12:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Nominations
What is the process on nominating recepients of the VC? Who picks nominees, and who decides upon who wins them? Kaiser matias 05:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Kaiser I read recently that to be nominated for a Victoria Cross or a George Cross has a specific process. The units CO writes up the recommendation which he passes up the chain of command to the MOD for consideration, this is the same for all military awards. The citations that are endorsed are passed to the overall operational commander, for further comparison and comment before being passed to the MOD's Armed Forces Operational Awards Committee.

This committee, which is chaired by the Defence Services Secretary, includes the Naval, Military and Air Secretaries and the Deputy Chief of Joint Operations and recommends which awards should be made and in what quantity. These recommendations are then endorsed by the MOD Services Honours Committee before being submitted to Her Majesty The Queen through the Secretary of State for Defence for her approval.

There is an additional step for recommendations of the two highest awards – the Victoria Cross and the George Cross. VC recommendations are endorsed by the VC Committee comprising the Permanent Under Secretary and Service Chiefs of Staff. Those for the George Cross are endorsed by members of the George Cross Military Committee, which is a sub-committee of the Honours and Decorations Committee.

The MOD have a webpage which explains it @ This Page 82.3.105.86 (talk) 20:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Isn't it also that the act for which they are awarded the VC has to be witnessed? That has led to a few not being awarded because there weren't any appropriate witnesses -- SteveCrook (talk) 22:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Historical background
This article doesn't give much historical background. Why was it created? What was the situation with awards for gallantry before the VC was created (only awarded to officers). Who supported its creation (Victoria and Albert) and who opposed it (the Army and the civil service). It could also be worth noting the rate at which they've been awarded and that it's much harder to win one now -- SteveCrook 21:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Other nations VCs
On the infobox, where the next above/below in the order of precedence are listed, I've removed the Star of Military Valour (the Canadian decoration), because the Canadian version of the VC has its own page, which is not the case (as yet) with the Australian and New Zealand versions. As and when these two versions gain their own pages, then the next below Australian and NZ decorations should also be removed to those pages. Hammersfan 15/06/07, 10.50 BST

Rearranging as per GA review
I have reaaranged the page so that it more closely resembles the Medal of Honour page. I have done this because the Medal of Honour page is a Featured article and as such is the benchmark. It has been rearranged with the intention of reacquiring good article status. I have not deleted anything during the rearranging and i have only added small bits. Woodym555 19:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have now introduced a table into the collections area so as to remove the list that had accumulated. The list was commented on in the last GA review and that is why i have swapped it for a table. Woodym555 13:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * There are a lot more museums that hold medals. The ones in the table are just the national museums. The page at http://www.victoriacross.org.uk/ccregmus.htm gives a lot more, like The South Wales Borderers Museum (24th Regiment of Foot) at Brecon which has 16 VCs on display -- SteveCrook 16:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I got all the information i used from that website, if there are large collections that are not listed, then list them! Also, do you think that the limit should be five or ten, what do you think is the definition of substantial? I think it has to be over 5 otherwise every small town museum would have to be listed which is quite a few. Updated Woodym555 22:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The other museums are listed further down on that same page on http://www.victoriacross.org.uk/ccregmus.htm Quite a few of them hold 5 or more medals. But I see that's been changed to 10 or more which seems reasonable to me and that the South Wales Borderers have already been added. I'm adding those that hold 10 medals to the table -- SteveCrook 21:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 award to New Zealand personnel
As this person was awarded the New Zealand Victoria Cross the number of awards should not be changed. I do suggest though that a New Zealand Victoria Cross page is set up and the total is put there. I have updated this page to reflect his achievement.Woodym555, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Where did you read that it is a "New Zealand Victoria Cross" and not a Victoria Cross? Moriori 02:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I asked because I didn't know, but do now. Raises a can of worms. Moriori 02:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a problem with the sentence in the intro which reads: Only 14 medals have been awarded since the end of the Second World War. and which is repeated in the articles on the Australian and New Zealand VCs. The problem is, of course, that we now have the confusion that 13 British VCs and 1 New Zealand VC have been awarded, and conflating the two figures into one is both misleading and inaccurate. How should we get round this problem? -- Arwel (talk) 19:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that there is now a problem and a can of worms. I have put wikicode at the top of the article asking for no changes to data in this article at the moment. I personally think that the awards are separate awards and so the data should not be chnaged. The article itself explains the difference between the awards in the separate Commonwealth Awards section. The issue is confused though with the NZ announcement press pack that states he is the 14th recipient of the VC. I still think though that the numbers should be separate. What does everyone else think? Woodym555 19:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The main difference between the two awards, is one is under a British Royal Warrant, while the other, a New Zealand Royal Warrant Brian | (Talk) 20:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Could we not use a term such as Victoria Cross variants? e.g There are currently fourteen living recipients of a variant of the Victoria Cross. I know this may sound a bit clunky but i am sure a new word or phrasing could be used. What does everyone think?Woodym555 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I note that the NZDF VC page makes a distinction between the 'VC' and the 'VC for NZ', in that they say "A total of 21 (British) Victoria Crosses and one Bar have been awarded to New Zealanders. The first, and to date, only award of the Victoria Cross for New Zealand was made to Corporal Bill (Willy) Apiata". I would support a wording in this wiki-article that indentifies the numbers per British/Australian/NZ/Canadian VC. How about "14 variants of the medal have been awarded since..."PalawanOz 05:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that it is useful to try and lump all these 'variants' together. The AUS/NZ/Can VCs are now a completely independent creature from the 'Commonwealth' (or UK) VC.  Different imperatives now govern their award and, while it might be nice to suggest some sort of unity between the four, the reality is that they share a name and design, nothing more.  I don't think that there is any sort of inter-governmental setup to keep the various national Warrants in step with one another.  Canada, unlike the rest, awards the VC when engaged in peacekeeping so the awards are already out of sync.


 *  X damr  talk 14:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Why call it a VC if it is not a VC? Variants should be included on the page - the intent was to identify it with the famous VC minted originally in the 1800s. It is simply a regional variation. To not mention it would only create more confusion.139.48.81.98 14:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the Australian, Canadian, and New Zealand VCs are no longer the same medal as the original VC, even though all except the Canadian one look exactly the same; there are different issuing authorities, with no doubt different criteria for determining who wins the medal, so since Cpl Apiata got his, adding all the ones issued into one grand total is simply incorrect now. -- Arwel (talk) 17:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would argue that with the exception of the Canadian one, they are still directly comparable. I'm not 100% on the NZ one, but the Australian one at least has the same criteria to be awarded it (word for word I think), has the same design, is made of the same stuff and still has to be approved by the Queen.59.101.225.116 09:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * According to the NZDF, the medal is the same as what the British award. The only change that I noticed with the VC's is that Canada, instead of using the French or English "For Valor" text, they used Latin text. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 10:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes the NZ and Australia awards are the same in all but name. The Canadian one uses a different metal as well. That is the key problem, they have separate names, they are separate awards. Therefore the question that we now have is whether the figures should be separate. Should it be 14 VCs awarded since the end of the Second World War, should it be 14 variants, or should it be 13 andd one NZVC? Woodym555 10:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was thinking we can mix the stats in, and provide a citation and a note saying this combines the national/British VC's. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Foreign Equivalents
Isn't the German Iron Cross also equivalent so should be listed at the end? Hugo999 00:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Already have it, "Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross (Nazi Germany)" under the "The following obsolete military decorations were the highest in their country at the time" heading. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of "Warrant" in the original Royal Warrant
I've checked the image of the original Royal Warrant available via the National Archives website, and it certainly looks to me that "warrant" (not "warrent") is used throught Article 14. If anyone wishes to check for themselves, Article 14 is in Image 6/7 (they won't necessarily appear in order). This link, may give direct access http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/DoLUserDownload/PRO_1102619/wo/98/1/0/6.pdf but will expire in a short time I think. David Underdown 14:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, could we use this as a reference or will the link go dead soon? Woodym555 14:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if we can safely link direct to the image, this: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/details-result.asp?Edoc_Id=7477210&queryType=1&resultcount=3 should be stable and it's only a couple of clicks from there - all part of first link from "Archives" in the article. As I've said before, I could be perceived to have a conflict of interest in "pushing" links to the National Archives.  So I'll leave it up to everyone else to determine how best to include this.  David Underdown 14:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * On a slightly different note, I dn't think it's really appropriate to label the quotes with "ang". Old English, refers to the language spoken in England between the 5th and 12th centuries, so isn's really correct for a document wirtten in the mid nineteenth century.  David Underdown 14:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it serves its purpose. It prevents AWB from wanting to edit the older text. Whilst the text is not 800 years old, it is 150 years old and there are slight variations in language in these quotes. Woodym555 15:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I just thought I'd mention that Abbot and Tamplin's 'British Gallantry Awards' (which is pretty exact so far as observing the original spellings goes) also spells it as 'warrant'. Having taken a look at the pdf provided, I agree with the consensus here.  --  X damr  talk 15:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Powers of VC Winners
I read in Wartime, the Australian war museam magazine, that VC winners could parade the Buckingham palace guard, and one Aussie Vc winner did so, however, I cannot find the issue. Should this be mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.90.118 (talk) 11:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * This should only be readded if you can provide the issue or another reliable source to verify the claims. I have never heard of it, although that is by no means to say that this is not true. I can't see anything about it in "Victoria Cross Heroes" which is a very well researched book. Woodym555 11:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * And what exactly does it mean by "parade the guards"? Have the power to demand they be paraded? If so, how many of them? Do you get the band and the mounted divisions as well? Is the VC winner meant to be able to take command of them or do they just take the salute? "Parade the Buckingham Palace guard" is a bit of an unclear phrase -- SteveCrook 16:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

It is Issue 29 of this magazine. If only I could find my copy somewhere! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.77.134 (talk) 07:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a verifiable source, but I have also read of this (not in Wartime). According to what I read, the bloke rocked up to the ceremony quite late and then gave a formation of troops a bunch of orders which he could do by virtue of winning the VC. I'll see if I can remember where I read it. 59.101.156.172 11:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but that sounds even more unlikely. I don't doubt that you read it somewhere, but I doubt that what you read was true. It makes it sound as if he was given the troops as his playthings to do whatever he wanted with. I really can't see that happening. He turned up late, was he drunk as well? -- SteveCrook 16:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

List of museums
The VC page says the Army Medical Services Museum has 22 VCs, but the Army Medical Services Museum page says that it has 23. Can someone correct whichever one is wrong? Will Bradshaw (talk) 00:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I suspect the discrepancy lies in the "Netley VC" (see the recipients section of the article). Or possibly the museum has acquired another since the figures were added to the article.  David Underdown (talk) 09:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)