Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Victoria Cross

This page serves as a project discussion for the Fully featured topic, Victoria Cross. Every article in this topic is featured if possible. Appropriate discussion on this page includes: Working definition of the topic. Vital improvements to articles necessary to maintain status for the topic. Potential improvements to the topic's member articles. Possible additions to the scope of the topic. General questions about maintaining good and featured topics can also be referred to Wikipedia talk:Good topics and Wikipedia talk:Featured topics . Topic milestones Date Process Result September 5, 2007 Featured topic candidate Promoted with articles Victoria Cross, Victoria Cross for Australia, Victoria Cross (Canada) and Victoria Cross for New Zealand September 28, 2010 Featured topic candidate Not promoted September 30, 2011 Supplementary nomination Added List of Victoria Cross recipients (A–F), List of Victoria Cross recipients (G–M), List of Victoria Cross recipients (N–Z) and List of Victoria Cross recipients by campaign Current Status: Featured topic

Military history: British / European Project‑class

This page 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 Project This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale. Associated task forces: /  British military history task force European military history task force

The working definition is, "the forms of the Victoria Cross given around the world." --PresN 23:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This topic satisfies the criteria. --PresN 23:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For Victoria Cross for Australia and Victoria Cross (Canada) to be improved to FA. --PresN 23:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None at the moment. --PresN 23:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recipients

I disagree! Some possible list-related additions are:

• List of Victoria Cross recipients by name - Z
  (this could form a subtopic if an appropriate lead is found)
• List of living Victoria Cross recipients
• List of Afghanistan War (2001) Victoria Cross recipents
  (this could form a subtopic)
• List of Victoria Cross recipients of uncertain Nationality
  (again, this could form a subtopic)
• List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Royal Navy (FL) and List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Indian Army (FL) (with more articles in a similar vein which would need to be added)
• List of Victoria Crosses by School

That's a lot! Some other possible additions are:

• The Victoria Cross and George Cross Association
  - Association for living recipients
• William Lummis and David Charles Harvey - both researched the VC
• Hancocks
  - the jeweller who makes the VC
• Dickin Medal - "has become recognised as "the animals' Victoria Cross"."
• Tomb of the Unknowns
  - notable recipient
• Recipients who forfeited the cross and those who won it twice are also particularly notable
• Fictional recipients could be added, though no doubt this category is far from complete
• Books about the VC could be added

...and I think that's everything we could add! rst20xx (talk) 16:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are all tangentially related, but do not fall into the scope of the working definition which is: "the forms of the Victoria Cross around the world." I see this FT as the "medals FT," I am working on the recipients ones. They all work off different lists, Lists by nationality, lists by campaign, lists by surname. Each of those could be separate FTs as far as I can see and not part of this one. Woody (talk) 16:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's true, as I said at various points, other articles could form related topics/subtopics of this one instead of being added to it (which indeed would probably be more sensible considering the size of some of these groupings). Additionally, the working definition can always be changed to fit the articles, so long as it is still well defined, so that's not a problem. I was just listing ideas.

I'm glad to hear you're working on more FTs :) rst20xx (talk) 17:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]