Talk:Royal Fusiliers
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Royal Fusiliers article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Edits to 10th (Service) Battalion edit
I don’t know where the previous figure of 400 men of the Stockbrokers’ Battalion came from, but I’ve edited it to show the figure that is stated by Carter (2014): according to Carter this comprised 440 KiAs, 249 DoWs, and 53 MiAs. A further 1958 were wounded, but survived, taking their total casualties to precisely 2700, assuming that Carter’s data are accurate.
On a wider point, the laxness in specifying casualties and losses in Wikipedia is dreadful, and needs tightening up! I suspect that the 400 came from someone reading that 408 other ranks (i.e. excluding officers) had been KiA, and decided that 400 was ‘close enough for government work’. However, this figure excludes the 32 officers who were also KiA (don’t they count?), the 249 who died of wounds (and were therefore just as dead), and the 53 missing in action, who in the context of the Western Front, were almost certainly dead as well. To count only the KiAs and only those among the ORs, then to round it down to the nearest hundred, is doing a disservice to the others who died.
I’ve also added ‘and others from the area’, because only a minority were actually stockbrokers, or even worked at the Stock Exchange. The majority were clerks and other workers from the City of London and surrounding districts. (Of one sample of 331 volunteers mentioned by Carter, only 168 were known to have had jobs in stockbroking, banking, insurance, and trading; others included gardeners, surveyors, engineers, and a wide variety of other occupations.)
Also, is the 10th (Service) Battalion is sufficiently well documented to warrant its own page? There’s more than enough peer-reviewed evidence available. --Wally Tharg (talk) 12:20, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
