More information Article milestones, Date ...
| Edward VIII is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. |
| This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 8, 2008. |
Article milestones |
---|
Date | Process | Result |
---|
February 1, 2007 | Good article nominee | Listed | February 26, 2007 | Peer review | Reviewed | March 9, 2007 | Featured article candidate | Promoted | June 14, 2007 | Featured topic candidate | Not promoted | September 16, 2008 | Featured topic candidate | Not promoted | October 10, 2020 | Featured article review | Kept | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 3, 2004, December 10, 2004, June 3, 2005, June 3, 2006, June 3, 2008, June 3, 2009, June 3, 2010, June 3, 2011, June 3, 2012, June 3, 2016, June 3, 2017, June 3, 2021, and June 3, 2024. | Current status: Featured article |
|
Close
More information Associated task forces: ...
|
| This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles | | |
|
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Commonwealth, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Commonwealth of Nations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CommonwealthWikipedia:WikiProject CommonwealthTemplate:WikiProject CommonwealthCommonwealth articles | |
|
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles | | Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles | | Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles | | High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles | | High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
Close
More information Older discussions: ...
| This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
- RM, Edward VIII of the United Kingdom → Edward VIII, Moved, 26 September 2011, discussion
- RM, Edward VIII → Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, No consensus, 20 July 2014, discussion
- RM, Edward VIII → Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, Not moved, 21 January 2018, discussion
- RM, Edward VIII → Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, Not moved, 30 July 2023, discussion
|
Close
| This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 7 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
An article from the CBC (see section "Captured documents suggest the duke encouraged the Germans to bomb Britain"), quotes biographer Andrew Lownie's interpretation of a cable in the Marburg Files. This cable, apparently sent in 1940, would have been sent during the Blitz. I am not a habitual contributor to pages on historical figures, but perhaps this would be a good addition to the penultimate paragraph of Edward_VIII#Second_World_War? RSXS (talk) 23:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I did a cursory skim and couldn't find any scholarly reviews of the book, or any evidence it had been peer reviewed prior to release. It seems that he hasn't been given much credence by historians of the period—which is telling, because contrary to what many will insist, academics love arguing with public dilettantes and cranks if it makes their field more visible for a moment. That is to say, I wouldn't call Lownie a crank, I haven't read his book, but I would need to see some scholarly engagement with it before including it in the article. Remsense诉 00:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's already in Marburg Files#Contents with a suitable rejoinder. Typically, Nazi (or any totalitarian) sources are not given much credence by proper historians, because they are often untruthful. DrKay (talk) 06:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't during the Blitz, which started in September 1940, it was a cable from the German ambassador in Portugal to Ribbentrop on 10 July, asserting, 'The Duke believes with certainty that continued heavy bombing will make England ready for peace.' (Cited by Lownie to DGFP [Documents on German Foreign Policy] AA-B15/B002549, Vol.X, p.152.) This is, of course, a Nazi diplomat telling his superior what he thinks the superior wants to hear, but it is probably true, since there are so many accounts of Windsor's defeatism and Nazi sympathies at the time. He was a foolish person and he seems to have believed that Britain could not win, that the government would fall, his brother Bertie, George VI, would abdicate and he would be re-enthroned, to a rapturous public reception, as what his brother the Duke of Kent (among others) satirically called a 'Gauleiter'. The odd thing in the cable is the reference to 'continued heavy bombing', since the Germans were not doing much bombing of Britain at the time -- they started attacking Channel convoys on 10 July (a day on which the RAF lost only three Hurricanes, one of them due to an accident), but did not attack Fighter Command airfields till August, or London till September. Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
discuss3MRB1 (talk) 09:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- It would be much easier if you could make your points in complete sentences. You've simply not added anything to the article but a redundant, poor-quality source as far as I can tell. Sorry. Remsense诉 09:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Remsense *https://web.archive.org/web/20200723104341/https://www.americanheritage.com/secret-treason
- discuss 3MRB1 (talk) 10:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's a poor-quality source that doesn't add anything to the article, whose claims are already covered by a better-quality source. Remsense诉 10:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- The source clarifies the date of the interview as 19 December? But the article doesn't mention that anyway, so it's probably unnecessary detail? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Martinevans123 amhist is a forbes mag , the article of very many pages is by son about father and E8 3MRB1 (talk) 10:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I know, I read it. Which aspect of the article is this being offered to support? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Martinevans123 the interview and article 3MRB1 (talk) 10:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- We do not add ever more sources because we think they are interesting, they are meant to support specific claims made in the article. The relevant claims made in the article are already adequately cited. Remsense诉 10:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Remsense point&click versus get books from somewhere 3MRB1 (talk) 10:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- The ease of access of a source is generally not a factor in whether it's considered reliable; the quality of a source usually trumps perceived ease of access. Remsense诉 10:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's still unclear for which details in this article you are proposing to use the American Heritage piece as a source. It might be a useful source at Fulton Oursler, as it is written by his son. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't want to get into a revert war for the sake of a comma as I don't find it productive, however with the comma included the sentence can be taken to mean all historians, not just historians such as the one cited. Therefore I felt removal of the comma appropriate to clear this ambiguity. Also, please only revert when necessary. For a reversion to be appropriate, the reverted edit must actually make the article worse. WP:ONLYREVERT Itsziggyp (talk) 12:33, 15 August 2024 (UTC)