Talk:Naval Long Service and Good Conduct Medal (1848)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Naval Long Service and Good Conduct Medal (1848). 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/20150924110252/http://www.stephen-stratford.co.uk/ls_and_gc.htm to http://www.stephen-stratford.co.uk/ls_and_gc.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:11, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Award criteria - the qualifying period

It is alluded to that the qualifying period went up to eighteen years, then down to fifteen. I am not seeing more than fifteen years for the RN LSGC recipients I have looked at for WW1 and WW2. Is this a case of "the internet says" which is mixing British Army LSGC rules with those of the Admiralty? Had there been a levelling up with the British Army LSGC rules, I would have expected this to be reflected in Douglas- Morris's definitive work on this award. There is nothing whatsoever therein to back the wiki assertion that eighteen years service was needed. Keith H99 (talk) 20:30, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Quote from page 5 of McCreery

The Royal Naval Long Service and Good Conduct Medal was initially awarded for 21 years of exemplary conduct in the Royal Navy; this period was later lowered to ten years, and then increased to 15 years.

This is in line with Douglas-Morris.

Confusingly, though, the Canadian award that superseded the Naval LSGC, in existence from 1925 to 1951, did require 18 years service, as did the equivalent award for the Canadian Army & RCAF, according to page 99 of McCreery. Keith H99 (talk) 13:39, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

However, two other sources state that the RCN LSGC qualifying period was 15 years, like that of the Royal Navy

https://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/medals-decorations/details/59

https://web.archive.org/web/20131017004918/http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhr-ddhr/chc-tdh/lsm-da-eng.asp

It only takes a moment to publish a falsehood, yet it takes a lot longer to get it remedied! Keith H99 (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

It would appear that in 1977 the Long Service Medal for RAF and British Army were brought in line with the Royal Navy, so that a qualifying period of fifteen years was the same across all three services. This may be where the confusion has arisen. I am still not seeing any reliable source-based evidence that the RN LSGC qualifying period was ever 18 years. Keith H99 (talk) 09:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The same generic content was used as a summary for all three branches and their LSGC medals. The comment about the reduction from eighteen to fifteen was not taken out for the Royal Navy, which would appear to explain why this error came about. This comment was removed for all three services on 7 December 2016. Keith H99 (talk) 18:08, 30 May 2022 (UTC)