100:. While nuclear weapons were obviously not used, the British warships that were sent to the South Atlantic carried most of the country's nuclear depth bombs, mainly as it would have taken too long to have offloaded them. However, the British government and military did not seriously consider using nuclear weapons and the War Cabinet never wanted the depth bombs sent south. It was reported during and after the war that a British ballistic missile submarine had been sent to menace Argentina but historians have found no evidence that such a deployment took place. Interestingly, it has emerged in recent years that British Prime Minister Thatcher might have been willing to use nuclear weapons if the war had gone disastrously for her. Historians and international relations experts have also discussed why Argentina decided to invade British territory despite the UK being nuclear power and the broader implications of this.
1168:
relation to
Thatcher's possible actions as covered in the last two paras of the 'During the war' section, where I've sought to explain the different views and conclusions. These differences are largely due to Sir Michael Quinlan's revelations after the official history was published. The Argentinian Government also has a different interpretation of the Treaty of Tlatelolco from Freedman and other historians, and I've also sought to cover this. The 'British nuclear weapons policies' section is also an example of where I've provided accounts by different historians on an issue Freedman has covered.
490:: a bit woolly, I think -- we probably should have said how far the Falklands were from the UK earlier, so "a great distance" is both vague and, in an ideal world, unnecessary. Similarly, "substantial military forces" -- by 2024 British standards, yes, but by almost anyone else's it was a pretty small operation, at least initially. Aren't military campaigns inherently risky, especially for the people taking part? Do we mean militarily risky (they might have lost) or politically? I think there's something here, but it would be worth recouching it in terms of what made this campaign
1090:
concerning intelligence - this restriction usually applies only to material on intelligence collection operations or practices that remain active. The book was published by an academic press and has been widely cited by other works on this issue as well as the
Falklands War more broadly, including some that are critical of the British government's actions. All the reviews I've seen have been positive: I don't think that provisos would be needed unless multiple reviews have judged the book less than fully reliable or independent. Many thanks for these comments.
3179:
practiced
Operation Black Buck over the North Atlantic, but all the sources I've seen have said this was done with conventional bombs. As Sechser & Fuhrmann are the only source that notes a possible a nuclear connection to the Black Buck raids (while noting that the British never intended to use the Vulcans as nuclear bombers during the Falklands War) I don't think that there's much more that can be said.
2858:"Prior to the Falklands War the British government had also provided a commitment not to use its nuclear weapons against countries that did not possess these weapons." My understanding is that the UK gave an undertaking that it "will not use, or threaten to use, nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear weapon state
2862:" or "in material breach of the NPT" (emphasis mine). Argentina had not signed the NPT. Consider adding that it did not do so until 1995. The reader might infer too much into the fact that Argentina did not have nuclear weapons; at the time, but there was grave concern about Argentina's nuclear weapons program.
1629:, which seems odd -- weren't all the other admirals, scientists, historians and so on experts? Secondly and more importantly, he was also a Labour/SDP MP, and there was a pretty serious debate going on in those circles about nuclear disarmament -- it's not as if he was a detached commentator on the matter.
2884:
The reader might also infer that this was some solemn undertaking by the UK government, but it modified it in 1990 in response to the threat of chemical and biological weapons from Iraq, so the current stance is that "Security assurances extended to other countries by the UK are now subject to review
2867:
This is covered by the second para of the 'Pre-war' section. The sources note that while technically
Argentina wasn't a non-nuclear power the UK treated it as such. I've added some extra material on Argentina; the sources don't note that the British had any concern over its nuclear program during the
418:
My issue is that, when you think about it, this material isn't actually relevant. It isn't important to what happened in 1982 that the
Falklands are a BOT in 2024, or that there has been a long-running dispute in 2024 -- it matters what the status of that dispute was in 1982. I think we'd be on safer
2668:
Refs #2, #5, #11, #23, #28, #30, #49-50, #52, #54, #61; Freedman 1989, Iacono 2022, Polmar 2007? Or you could just run the IA bot and it will archive all these for you. The sites hosting these sources will never go down in all probability, but their URLs may change and prudence never hurts anyways.
2461:
this happened. I've trimmed the "Commentary on nuclear deterrence" though to avoid a bit of duplication - I think that this also helps clarify the structure of this section, with the first para discussing views on why the UK didn't use nuclear weapons in these particular circumstances and the second
749:
Yes, the
British could have blockaded them or similar to force the Argentinians to give them up. For instance, the British seriously considered landing troops on an isolated part of West Falkland and building a military airfield instead of attacking the main Argentine forces on East Falkland as part
440:
I've tweaked the wording a bit here. The history of the dispute isn't really relevant to this article: what I think is significant is to briefly indicate that there was a long running dispute (to help explain to readers why such an unlikely and now somewhat little known war took place) and that the
291:
Tweaked. None of the sources discuss the views of other military commanders involved in the war other than the commander of the nuclear missile submarine that was alleged to have been deployed to be able to attack
Argentina. I recently read Woodward's memoirs from cover to cover and he doesn't note
2970:
Just a very quick comment as I don't have time to review this in full. The article (very interesting!) mentions
Thatcher's purported views on using nuclear weapons in the war, citing Hennessy and Jinks (2016) and Quinlan's interview (2013). Have you checked Charles Moore's biography of Thatcher? I
2452:
Are you referring to the para that starts with "The
Argentine government was aware"? This covers the facts of the Argentinian Government's decision making, of which there isn't any disagreement over. The "Commentary on nuclear deterrence" section then covers various commentators and experts views.
1632:
Tweaked here. The section is about people's views, so whether they're detached or not doesn't seem particularly relevant as long as readers know where they're coming from. An interesting feature of the debate over nuclear weapons, especially during the Cold War, is the cross-overs between politics
1167:
I already have checked every available reference, many of which cite
Freedman. Hennessy and Jinks re-assessed some matters that Freedman considered and ended up largely agreeing with him (Hennessy is an expert on British nuclear weapons policies and deployments). The main discrepancy I found is in
531:
Sure, but the air and naval forces were not and the sources agree, including those cited here, this made the war highly risky. Woodward also stressed how risky the campaign was in his memoirs on purely logistical grounds given that he wouldn't have been able to maintain his fleet off the Falklands
346:
that the Argentines considered the British commitment to be unreliable, but also that (e. g.) the missiles wouldn't work, they would be able to intercept them, it was worth the risk, etc etc? Later, we suggest that they were more reassured that the superpowers would stop the British from launching
3174:
Is there anything more on the Vulcan bombing raids? I believe one long-range flight was conducted with the express purpose of demonstrating Britain's ability to deliver a (potential) nuclear bomb over that distance. The article skims over the role of the Vulcans quite briefly which surprised me a
2069:
It already is. The idea of this section is to give readers an understanding of the nature of the war rather than its exact chronology given the issues the article covers are more relevant to what the war was like than its course (most of the key decisions covered in the article took place before
1389:
I agree that it appears to be nonsense, but Hennessy and Jinks considered the claim worth discussing and evaluating in their book, so I think that this should be included. Both these authors are experts on the history of the British nuclear weapons arsenal. There's also a long-running myth that
1203:
Freedman states that he couldn't find any documentation of such a deployment and dismisses it as a result and Hennessy and Jinks reached the same conclusion, including after interviewing the relevant submarine captain and his commander. As such, I think that this wording is an accurate summary.
978:
The United States Naval Institute Proceedings began in 1874 as The Papers and Proceedings of the United States Naval Institute, though "Papers and Proceedings" shortened to "Proceedings" by 1879. Some early issues were titled "The Record of the United States Naval Institute" even as the volumes
1089:
are actually almost entirely independent of government and able to write about almost anything and reach conclusions independently. Consistent with this practice, the only restriction Freedman notes in the book's introduction is that he was limited in what he could write about on a few matters
1145:
I know that's a blog, but I would definitely still take caution here -- it's good that we're not talking about works that are explicitly censored, but if the British government is choosing who writes the book and (indirectly) the sources to which they have access, we can't call the work fully
3178:
I haven't seen any sources saying that. The Vulcan force operated almost exclusively in the nuclear role before the war and this was frequently practiced, but didn't do extremely long range flights as their air-to-air refuelling capability had been removed. Once this was re-added the Vulcans
399:
Given that the dispute is still ongoing and the war didn't resolve it, I think that this wording is OK. It also helps to explain the post-war squabbling over whether the UK had stationed nuclear weapons in the Falklands. If the dispute is ever resolved, I'd be happy to update this!
1390:
France was recalcitrant in helping the UK counter Exocet missiles during the Falklands War, which presumably this claim relates to (in reality the French government provided the British with considerable assistance to stop Argentina getting more of these missiles during the war).
2137:" A total of 100 warheads fitted to standard Polaris missiles and 35 fitted to missiles that had been upgraded through the Chevaline programme were carried by the Royal Navy's four ballistic missile submarines." I don't see how this is supported by the source cited.
1521:
Yes, I think it was -- worth adding, as otherwise it's a bit confusing as to why Australia would have had such an issue (readers might know that New Zealand doesn't allow nuclear weapons in its territorial waters, but Australia has never had such a prohibition).
225:: most pilots never seriously consider using their ejection seat, even if they have one in the aircraft. Secondly, the word "initially" is slippery -- it could mean anything from "when they were built, years earlier" to "in the opening stages of the conflict".
1892:
I think that guideline provides bad advice here. It seems unjustified to fiddle with the titles of works to deviate from what the author or the journal/book's editor has selected. As it's only a guideline, I'd prefer to stick with the original capitalisation.
1200:: I don't think we actually put it quite this strongly in the article, so I'm going to cry here. We've outlined a few good reasons to believe that it wasn't, and that Freedman couldn't find any in the archives, but neither of those are quite the same thing.
1130:
is a useful brief overview of British official histories, and notes that while there are some concerns over the genre the standard in the UK these days is good. It describes Freedman's official history which this article cites as being "acclaimed".
1111:: I'm not disagreeing, but would be interested in some reading on that topic -- I'm reminded of an interview where (I think) Andrew Marr protested that nobody at the BBC had ever told him which questions to ask, to be told that if they thought they
3135:
I've changed the first and tweaked the third, but I think that the other one is OK given it's about the first British nuclear test which there's no need to specifically name in this article (especially as the name of the test is fairly obscure).
626:
I don't think it would hurt to explain that they were intended to be used against the Warsaw Pact in the event of a Soviet invasion of western Europe (or at least to deter that from happening), but not a major issue -- the current framing works.
2890:
The article covers what the relevant British policy was at the time of the war. I've added material to the lead on the relevant international norms (it's striking that the Cold War era British military didn't even consider using these weapons).
879:
It was due to the British policy of not disclosing the whereabouts of nuclear weapons - the next para notes that this was a significant consideration at the time. I've added some material earlier in the article on this to help provide context.
1435:
I've added a reference. The aircraft's serial number would be a bit confusing if not explained in this context, and I'd prefer to omit it given it's not relevant to the subject of the article (the photo is to show what a Vulcan looks like).
109:
1506:
All the sources are oddly vague about the details here, but it would have almost certainly have been the Captain Cook Dry Dock in Sydney (as this is the only large naval dry dock in the country), which I think was a nuclear free zone.
309:
It has been alleged that a British ballistic missile submarine was sent to the South Atlantic to potentially attack Argentina. This has been denied by senior British government figures as well as the commander of the submarine in
2926:"conventional British forces could not be deployed at such a distance from the UK". There was a tiny garrison and an ice patrol vessel on station. Suggest "sufficient conventional forces to recapture the islands by force".
1226:
our way from "here are two sources who say that X probably isn't true" to "no reason exists to believe that X is true", and that's not workable. We either need a less cautious source or a more cautious phrasing, I think.
928:
This reflects the wording in the source that "there would be an unequivocal affirmation that nuclear weapons would not be used in the present context" if it was raised in Parliament. I've tweaked the wording a bit here.
107:
in May. It's turned out to be a much more complex and interesting topic than I expected, leading to a wide ranging article. The article was assessed as a GA in mid-June and passed a Military History Wikiproject
2092:
What I mean is something like 'Following a series of fierce battles the Argentine forces there were defeated and surrendered on 14 June 1982.' Thus putting the three things referred to in chronological order.
497:
I've tweaked the wording here to make it clearer: in short, the British forces weren't significantly superior to the Argentine forces, especially due to the distance the operation was conducted from the UK.
288:. I'm surprised that we don't get the views (either here or later, except on a related issue) of any other military people -- did Woodward ever express a view, for example, or any of the ships' commanders?
121:
144:
89:
1701:
I've removed the third sentence now that this has been covered earlier in the article. The second reference is to an earlier work by Freedman where he discussed Luard's views, not the official history.
3001:
I haven't been able to find a copy of this book here in Australia. If it had significant revelations about the topic of the article, I strongly suspect they would have been picked up in other sources.
573:
The Royal Navy's four ballistic missile submarines were equipped with 100 warheads fitted to standard Polaris missiles and 35 fitted to missiles that had been upgraded through the Chevaline programme.
2037:
1123:
217:
I hope this is helpful. As ever, please do let me know where I've been unclear or unfair, and I'm very happy to disagree on matters of taste (which is most of this review) without any prejudice.
1995:
1977:
1957:
1915:
1902:
1887:
1824:
1811:
1793:
1657:
1544:
1530:
1276:
1258:
1193:
A few more -- in general, where I haven't replied above, I'm more-or-less happy -- it's obvious that you've thought about the issues, usually before I have, and done your due diligence on them.
1177:
1158:
1140:
1067:
1053:
794:
780:
635:
541:
526:
450:
427:
378:
65:
3290:
2576:
104:
2841:
2528:"Argentina was believed to have three air-launched variants of these missiles remaining". Is that a total of three missiles, or an unknown number of missiles split between three variants?
3188:
3167:
3145:
3121:
2639:
2618:
2598:
292:
this issue at all, despite providing a very detailed account of his forces operations. I suspect that this is the result of the secrecy around the deployment of British nuclear weapons.
3250:
3230:
3098:
3074:
3057:
2980:
2818:
2796:
2774:
2756:
2736:
2701:
2066:"The Argentine forces there were defeated and surrendered on 14 June 1982 following a series of fierce battles." IMO this would read better if it were recast into chronological order.
2059:
178:
160:
2996:
2885:'if the future threat of weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical and biological capabilities, or emerging technologies that could have a comparable impact, makes it necessary".
2957:
2940:
2919:
2559:
2540:
2490:
2471:
2442:
2404:
2385:
2328:
2309:
2286:
2248:
2225:
2206:
2187:
2168:
2130:
1869:
1850:
1778:
1733:
1711:
1687:
1642:
1615:
1570:
1516:
1493:
1471:
1421:
1372:
In 2005 a psychoanalyst who had regularly met with French President François Mitterrand during the time of the Falklands War claimed that he had told her that Thatcher had threatened
1364:
1330:
1222:. "Archival evidence" and "evidence" are not the same thing, nor does the fact that one researcher could not find something demonstrate that it does not exist. More seriously, we've
1099:
1008:
990:
960:
938:
889:
832:
692:
670:
617:
591:
565:
480:
363:
332:
301:
3010:
2900:
2877:
2515:
2423:
2366:
2347:
2267:
2149:
2105:
2079:
1755:
1593:
1445:
1399:
1308:
1239:
911:
866:
759:
507:
409:
267:
768:
them (as opposed to having them returned 'voluntarily'), or it would have been by force. However, if you want to differentiate what happened from e.g. a blockade, you could say
340:
The British nuclear arsenal did not deter Argentina's invasion of the Falklands on 2 April 1982 due to the commitments the British government had made to not use these weapons.
1935:
708:
919:
If the issue was raised in Parliament, the government would have confirmed that nuclear weapons would not be used but not comment on whether the warships were carrying them.
2685:
2274:"Fort Austin returned to the UK on 29 June." Left the fleet to return starting on this date, or arrived back in the UK on this date? Is it known which port she arrived at?
1927:
I think that's my lot for now -- as ever, please do let me know where I've been unclear or unfair, and take (almost) all comments as suggestions rather than hard demands.
396:: as it's now over forty years later, I would couch this in 1982 terms. Put another way, if the dispute gets settled tomorrow, we shouldn't have to change this sentence.
3208:
3035:
1150:. That doesn't mean we should throw it out altogether when it's known to be a good work of scholarship, but I would be looking for corroborating sources where possible.
553:: after...? I know it's not particularly relevant, but if we're going to make readers ask the question, it seems fair to answer it given that we can do so very quickly.
1675:-- this isn't a statement of fact. I'm most likely to go for a run if it's sunny, but it's still possible that I might stay in on a nice day if I'm feeling a bit lazy.
899:: a little bit weasel-y -- can we be more precise as to who and how many, or is this all "I heard that some admirals were unhappy"? Might not be much we can do here.
206:
too simplistic in places -- it's very clear, but occasionally it almost reads like an introductory school-book that pulls some punches on detail and general polish.
1382:
applies, I think, as this is a fairly explosive (sorry) claim resting on pretty flimsy evidence. I know we don't endorse it, but by reporting it, we're giving it
213:
relevant (e.g. "who was that person? When did that happen?"), I think we should. Footnotes might help here, if you feel that the flow would be unduly interrupted.
2449:
Most of the last paragraph of "Nuclear weapons policies" either duplicates material in "Commentary on nuclear deterrence" or would fit better into that section.
1213:
736:
237:
1378:
doesn't vouch for this claim, and nobody else in the quality press seems to have even picked it up. I would be inclined to cut this, given the circumstances --
1907:
I disagree, but you're right that it's only a guideline, and I'm not at the point of opposing over something which makes very little difference to readers.
902:
Freedman states that these concerns were held by "some admirals" but isn't more specific I'm afraid. I've tweaked the wording to be slightly more specific.
2373:"an unnamed Conservative member of parliament. The Conservative MP ... suggested that the conservative MP who told Dalyell". Conservative or conservative?
1857:
The titles of cited works should be capitalised consistently, at least within source types (that is, all books the same way, all journals the same way...)
112:
in August. I have since further expanded and copy edited the article and am hopeful that it meets the FA criteria. Thank you in advance for your comments.
2005:
718:
the strong international norm against the use of nuclear weapons which had developed due to their devastating effects - often labelled the "nuclear taboo
3238:. My concerns have been addressed except for the last and I can't remember where I read that and if there are no sources there's not much we can do.
1078:
We have a lot of use here of the British official history of the war. I wouldn't go so far as to call that unreliable, but it's definitely not fully
2965:
2765:
Many thanks for this - I've been a bit unwell for the last week and wasn't looking forward to doing this manually. Thank you also for this review.
71:
3084:
though as it had not ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons or the Treaty of Tlatelolco at the time of the Falklands War
2849:
2547:"if the aircraft carriers were struck by Argentine Exocet missiles". Could there be a brief in line explanation of what an "Exocet missile" is.
1025:, and we should use that. In my own line of study, we have plenty of arcane journal abbreviations: open up any classical journal and you'll see
72:
2478:"failing to coerce a nation with a weaker military." The source given does not mention Argentina, or any country, having a weaker military.
2232:"The nuclear depth bombs on board Brilliant were transferred to RFA Fort Austin". Perhaps a brief explanation of what type and size of ship
1948:
Many thanks for this review - I might have now responded to all your comments. Sorry for this being a bit delayed: I've been a bit unwell.
1838:: this is cited to a 2024 page -- can we confirm that this was also the case in 1982 (it was, but our source doesn't strictly prove that).
419:
ground to talk about some of the key developments in Anglo-Argentine relations and the Falklands dispute in the decades preceding the war.
132:
File:Falklands,_Campaign,_(Distances_to_bases)_1982.jpg: source link is dead. Ditto File:HMS_Repulse_(S23)_in_the_Firth_of_Clyde_c1979.jpg
3062:
Yes, definitely. I was waiting for you to wrap up UC's very thorough review. I can't promise anything ttat thorough but give me 24 hours.
2784:
2140:
The numbers for 1982 are in the table on page 70 and the details of the warheads and how they were deployed are in the table on page 71.
278:
2854:
I think what you have done with this article is awe-inspiring! I note that 5% of the content has been added this month. A few comments:
488:
This campaign was very risky for the British and required the deployment of substantial military forces at a great distance from the UK.
40:
2316:"Seven of the containers holding active and inert nuclear weapons were damaged". Is the total number of bombs they contained known?
1698:
of airtime in his area of the article, and is double-cited with the official history: where does that second citation come in here?
979:
containing them had "Proceedings" in the title instead. The title permuted to "United States Naval Institute Proceedings" in 1907.
1109:
are actually almost entirely independent of government and able to write about almost anything and reach conclusions independently
2651:
2354:"The Conservative MP was likely the backbencher Alan Clark." If the article is written in UK English then "likely" → 'probably'.
2787:. Your MILHIST knowledge would be very helpful for improving the article. Thanks in advance, and hope you're feeling better now
1836:
Under British command and control procedures, the Prime Minister is the only person who can authorise the use of nuclear weapons
2783:. If it's not too much and you've recovered, it would be a great help if you could comment at a PR I've up and running, linked
1250:"historians have found no evidence"? Either way, we need to cite that, as it isn't quite what we say and cite in the article.
2335:"The surveillance rounds were inert WE.177As". What was it that caused them to be "inert"? Did they contain nuclear material?
648:
3263:
30:
17:
874:
While some of the nuclear depth bombs could have been offloaded from warships at Portsmouth, this could not be done covertly
3274:
876:: why would it need to be done covertly -- anything more than the obvious not wanting to tell the enemy what you're doing?
2430:"He also said though that the revelations had not harmed the relationship between Argentina and the UK." Delete "though".
2255:"The weapons on board Invincible were transferred to Fort Austin on 2–3 June." Where, approximately, did this take place?
370:
Good change -- it was the 1–1 link between the two statements, rather than each of them individually, that was the issue.
3155:
we've covered this above (almost word for word) and "this was due to" can almost always just be replaced with "because"
1128:
651:
1535:
From a bit of digging, it was actually due to the national government's policy - I've added a bit of material here.
2197:
I think that this is OK - it reads a bit weirdly without the 'still' given the amount of time the sentence covers.
221:
The first sentence (sorry to start so early!) could do with a bit of thought. I don't really like "even though" as
169:. There are some better photos for 1981 and 1983, but they're not significantly better. Thanks for these comments.
2673:
Link to Hans M. Kristensen in the biblio, and David Leigh & Ian Cobain in the refs as done for other authors?
2213:"the South Atlantic as well as their territorial waters." Maybe 'the South Atlantic or their territorial waters'?
354:
I've tweaked the wording here. The sources all agree that the Argentines weren't at all worried about this issue.
3018:
2886:
1501:
This led to Australian authorities declining permission for Invincible to be repaired in a dry dock during 1983.
2462:
para discussing views on whether the non-use means that nuclear weapons will not be used in any circumstances.
1649:
Agreed - no problem with including him, but readers need to be able to place the quotation in proper context.
1816:
Oops -- my brainfart -- I meant italicised! Now note 57; don't know whether that was an edit or my misread.
209:
If we can quickly and easily give a piece of information that answers a reader's question, even if it's not
3109:
does not read very well, and we can find a better way to start a sentence in an FA than "this was due to".
186:
103:
I developed this article to set the record straight after a really bad article on this topic was developed
2863:
191:
Very much enjoying the article, as I expected I would given the nominator. Three general pointers so far:
1290:
they were all judged to be "safe and serviceable" following inspections after they arrived back in the UK
441:
dispute continues given it's relevant to the section of the article covering developments since the war.
764:
That's still using force, as your wording (perhaps inadvertently) shows -- either it wouldn't have been
1769:
Do you have examples where I've missed this? Sheffield is consistently capitalised, except for a url.
806:
Sir Michael Quinlan, who had noted in a 2013 BBC interview that Thatcher had told him after the war...
2031:
1971:
1943:
1929:
1909:
1881:
1818:
1787:
1651:
1524:
1374:: literally, a lot of he-said, she-said here -- I must admit to being dubious. More importantly, the
1252:
1152:
1117:
1047:
774:
702:
629:
602:
520:
421:
372:
1969:
should be applied, but I don't think that represents a major problem that should hold up promotion.
2395:
It was the title of the job (the Royal Navy had a bunch of similarly-awkward titles at this time).
1198:
There is no evidence to support claims that one of these submarines was sent to the South Atlantic.
195:
I think the lead currently errs too much towards brevity rather than completeness -- remember that
608:
That seems outside the article's scope to be honest, but I've adjusted the wording to be clearer.
394:
a long-running sovereignty dispute over the islands between Argentina and the British government.
1379:
645:
It was legal for the UK to deploy nuclear weapons to other locations in the South Atlantic Ocean.
2156:"In addition, the British Armed Forces also had". You don't need both "In addition" and "also".
2614:
2572:
2015:
228:
I've simplified this sentence and moved the material on the depth bombs to later in the lead.
3245:
3203:
3069:
3030:
2503:
The source given still does not mention Argentina, or any country, having a weaker military.
2194:"but had still not ratified it at the time of the Falklands War." Suggest deleting "still".
151:
File:Prime_Minister_Margaret_Thatcher.jpg is quite grainy - is there no better alternative?
2837:
2792:
2752:
2697:
156:
2070:
there was any fighting, for instance). Our article on the war covers the chronology well.
925:
or similar -- we can't know for sure that they would have followed through with the plan.
8:
2976:
1045:
we spell them out in full so that they are accessible to readers outside the discipline.
3266:
has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see
3175:
little but possibly because it's the only prior knowledge I have of the subject matter.
2589:
Thanks a lot for this review. I think that I might have responded to all your comments.
2121:
Good pick up - I've tweaked this sentence and I think it reads much better as a result.
3089:
Yes, it is a bit of a mouthful! I've split this into two sentences which I hope helps.
2935:
2727:
I wasn't able to get the bot to work and haven't gotten up to doing this manually yet.
1038:
985:
2625:
2610:
2584:
2568:
2024:
2011:
2118:"The size of this force peaked". Is "force" the right word? 'stockpile', 'arsenal'?
2047:"defended only by a small party of Royal Marines." Is it possible to give a number?
1879:
advises the opposite approach. Is there a particular reason to divert from it here?
1013:
I read Hawkeye's comment as suggesting the opposite course of action -- it might be
750:
of a strategy to sustain a blockade and intensify diplomatic pressure on Argentina.
166:
3285:
3267:
3239:
3226:
3216:
3197:
3184:
3163:
3141:
3117:
3094:
3063:
3053:
3043:
3024:
3006:
2992:
2953:
2915:
2896:
2873:
2814:
2770:
2732:
2681:
2635:
2594:
2555:
2536:
2511:
2486:
2467:
2438:
2419:
2400:
2381:
2362:
2343:
2324:
2305:
2282:
2263:
2244:
2221:
2202:
2183:
2164:
2145:
2126:
2101:
2075:
2055:
1991:
1966:
1953:
1898:
1876:
1865:
1846:
1807:
1774:
1751:
1729:
1707:
1683:
1638:
1611:
1589:
1566:
1540:
1512:
1489:
1467:
1441:
1417:
1395:
1360:
1326:
1304:
1272:
1235:
1209:
1173:
1136:
1106:
1095:
1086:
1063:
1004:
956:
934:
907:
885:
862:
851:
828:
790:
755:
732:
688:
666:
613:
599:
Most of the American-owned warheads were assigned to British Army units in Germany.
587:
561:
537:
503:
476:
446:
405:
390:
an archipelago in the South Atlantic Ocean and a British Overseas Territory. There
359:
328:
297:
263:
233:
222:
174:
140:
117:
85:
61:
53:
2338:
No - I've added material explaining this in more detail. Thanks for this pick up.
1342:
member of parliament Tam Dalyell who claimed to have learned this from an unnamed
948:: outside journalism, more usual in BrE was "the Foreign Secretary, Francis Pym".
247:: titles in apposition like this, for politicians, are very American: BrE prefers
2833:
2788:
2748:
2693:
1407:
noting that it is not clear what 'codes' for Exocet missiles she was referring to
1293:
1267:
I've removed this as it was unnecessary and is covered elsewhere in the article.
1223:
654:, it's a tricky question as to whether a given breach of a treaty is technically
152:
2392:"who had been the Flag Officer Submarines." Why the upper-case initial letters?
582:
135 warheads in total. I've tweaked the wording here to hopefully clarify this.
468:
as more neutral (from the Argentine perspective, they were de-liberating them).
2972:
2029:
most of what I've got left is pretty small stuff, so don't wait on my account.
1042:
3129:
2930:
1219:
980:
285:
97:
1581:"nonnuclear" to "non-nuclear", in line with usage elsewhere in the article.
1115:
to tell him, they wouldn't have picked him for the job in the first place.
1841:
I've added a source that discusses the arrangements in place at the time.
1721:
is likewise not exactly detached: he runs an anti-nuclear pressure group.
3281:
3222:
3180:
3159:
3137:
3113:
3090:
3049:
3002:
2988:
2949:
2911:
2892:
2869:
2810:
2780:
2766:
2743:
Hi, I ran the bot myself, I hope that is alright. The source review is a
2728:
2707:
2677:
2657:
2631:
2590:
2551:
2532:
2507:
2482:
2463:
2434:
2415:
2396:
2377:
2358:
2339:
2320:
2301:
2278:
2259:
2240:
2217:
2198:
2179:
2160:
2141:
2122:
2097:
2071:
2051:
1987:
1949:
1894:
1861:
1860:
I've used the capitalisation used in the sources, which is inconsistent.
1842:
1803:
1770:
1747:
1725:
1718:
1703:
1679:
1634:
1607:
1585:
1578:
1562:
1536:
1508:
1485:
1463:
1437:
1413:
1391:
1356:
1322:
1300:
1268:
1231:
1205:
1169:
1132:
1091:
1059:
1000:
952:
930:
903:
881:
858:
824:
786:
751:
728:
684:
662:
609:
583:
576:
557:
533:
499:
472:
442:
401:
355:
324:
293:
259:
229:
170:
136:
113:
81:
57:
1503:: some areas of Australia are nuclear-free zones; was this one of them?
1318:: needs a capital, as we mean the party, not (just) the state of mind.
316:-- and be clearer that this was reported at the time, rather than just
840:'surveillance rounds' or 'training rounds'. The 'surveillance rounds'
199:
and have picked up as much information as we really need to give them.
2010:
Placeholder. Please ping ping me once UC starts to run out of steam.
1625:: two things here. Firstly, he's the first person we've listed as an
846:
is unclear on scare quotes, but generally doesn't like them. Suggest
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
1672:
1456:
809:
721:
514:
Numerically, perhaps, but the land forces at least were definitely
196:
2907:
Change the single quotes around "nuclear taboo" to double quotes?
1432:
Vulcan took part in the Falklands War. Suggest giving its number.
258:
That's interesting: Australia follows the US usage then. Tweaked.
2481:
Tweaked to specify they were referring to a non-nuclear country.
1082:. Is there anything we can do to corroborate it from other work?
3132:: "escalated in 1982", "first tested", "task force of warships"
785:
Trimmed to save words given it doesn't affect the meaning here.
342:: Hm -- can we know the cause and effect here for sure -- is it
2453:
I'd prefer to retain this structure to keep the material about
843:
971:
in the citation (the US Naval Institute). Is it ever cited as
1741:"A Critical Examination of "the Myth of Nuclear Deterrence"".
3048:
can I please check whether you'll be leaving comments here?
1802:
I'm not seeing this, sorry - it's capitalised in the title.
816:
endorses the factual accuracy of this, which we can't do --
683:
Done. Thank you for these detailed and thoughtful comments.
1479:
Officials dismissed the wartime speculation over this issue
848:
munitions termed "surveillance rounds" or "training rounds"
2987:
That's a good suggestion - I'll see if I can find a copy.
724:-- use either a spaced endash or an unspaced emdash here.
551:
This made the UK the third country to deploy these weapons
197:
we should be content for readers to stop at the end of it
462:
The British government decided to liberate the Falklands
96:
This article is about an interesting aspect of the 1982
2716:
Do you not wish to archive the URLs as suggested above?
2175:"the WE.177A nuclear depth bombs nuclear depth bombs".
605:
and what it was doing in Germany would be useful here.
3023:
Ooh, really interesting subject! Placeholder for now.
2630:
Sorry for the slow response here. I've replied above.
2457:
happened separate from the material covering views of
2319:
The source doesn't say and no other work covers this.
1601:
Royal United Services Institute fellow Jeremy Stocker
658:. Suggest "it would not have breached the treaty...".
2971:
think volume 1 looked at the Falklands War. Cheers, —
2809:
No worries. I'll look in on that PR on the weekend.
1386:
credence as a possibility, a "some people say" etc.
1230:
That's a good point: I've tweaked the wording here.
995:
As Hawkeye7 notes, it's usually referred to as just
746:: is there any other way to recapture some islands?
3153:
This was due to the strength of the "nuclear taboo"
2550:Yep: I've added that they were anti-ship missiles.
2411:"In these letters he had observed". Delete "had".
1623:In 1989 the British international relations expert
3298:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
2531:Three missiles - I've tweaked the wording here.
946:a proposal made by Foreign Secretary Francis Pym
556:I've added that this was after the US and USSR.
351:think Britain's commitment meant all that much.
2713:#11, #18, #38, #46, #58, #63, #70, #79: all ok.
1558:: we normally put a space after both initials.
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
1246:Better, but do either of our sources actually
897:concerns among some senior Royal Navy officers
579:would like "four" in figures for consistency.
3304:No further edits should be made to this page.
3280:template in place on the talk page until the
1105:The UK is one of the western countries where
1085:The UK is one of the western countries where
284:, and I would give his title and name him as
73:British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
3112:That's a good point: I've tweaked this para
2277:Also tweaked per the above to clarify this.
967:I think we should indicate the publisher of
850:, which sits better with that guideline and
277:: that was the Queen -- I think we mean the
2692:Will be doing spotchecks tomorrow. Cheers
41:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates
2506:Oops, I didn't make that edit. Now done.
1352:for consistency and to fit normal usage.
1023:United States Naval Institute Proceedings
347:nuclear weapons, which implies that they
1986:Many thanks for this excellent review.
14:
2376:Fixed as UC also spotted this mistake
1743:: single quotes within double quotes.
1633:and technical expertise on the topic.
1409:: double quote needed, but see above.
601:: I think a very brief comment on the
973:Proceedings of the US Naval Institute
253:Margaret Thatcher, the Prime Minister
249:the Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher
202:Similarly, I think the prose is just
18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates
2948:Done. Thanks a lot for this review.
2258:To the east of the Falklands; added
999:. I've added the publisher details.
680:: hyphenate as a compound modifier.
518:in terms of training and equipment.
3246:
3204:
3070:
3031:
1455:: endash, not hyphen, needed here (
1292:: consider dropping the quotes per
165:It's the best photo we have of her
23:
3107:The Argentine government was aware
1428:I'm going to need a citation that
24:
3316:
3128:I worry that we have quite a few
275:The head of the British military
245:Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
3086:bit of a complicated sentence.
2779:Thank you for your kind words @
2018:) 12: 09, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
3291:20:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3251:18:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
3011:02:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1766:in the titles of cited works.
1762:Make sure you capitalise e.g.
1481:: officials on which side(s)?
1220:it needs to be verifiable, too
744:recapture the islands by force
575:: a total of 100 or 100 each?
312:: can we therefore name it as
13:
1:
3231:10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3221:many thanks for this review.
3209:22:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
3189:10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3168:10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3146:10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3122:10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3099:10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3075:10:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
3058:10:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
2640:10:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
2516:10:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
2106:10:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
1965:: I maintain my opinion that
1785:Title parameter of note 56.
7:
3275:featured article candidates
3036:21:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
2997:11:11, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
2981:12:53, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
2958:06:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
2941:03:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
2920:06:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
2901:06:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
2878:06:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
2842:16:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
2819:10:18, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
2797:07:38, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
2775:00:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
2757:18:51, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
2737:08:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
2702:18:45, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
2686:11:08, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
2619:10:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
2599:10:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2577:19:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
2560:08:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2541:08:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2491:10:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2472:10:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2443:08:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2424:08:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2405:00:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
2386:00:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
2367:00:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
2348:10:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2329:05:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2310:06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2287:06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2268:07:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2249:06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2226:06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2207:06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2188:05:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2169:05:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2150:06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2131:05:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2080:05:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2060:05:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2038:16:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
1996:10:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
1978:09:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
1958:00:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1936:11:20, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1916:09:35, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
1903:00:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1888:11:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1870:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1851:23:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
1825:11:39, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
1812:10:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
1794:09:38, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
1779:23:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
1756:23:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
1734:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1712:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1688:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1658:11:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1643:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1616:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1594:11:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
1571:00:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1545:11:01, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
1531:11:50, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1517:11:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1494:11:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1472:00:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1446:11:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1422:00:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1400:00:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1365:00:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1331:00:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1309:00:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1277:00:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
1259:13:14, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
1240:10:42, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
1214:11:35, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1178:11:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
1159:10:28, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
1141:10:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
1124:20:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
1100:10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
1068:05:41, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
1054:20:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
1009:10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
991:17:37, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
961:10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
939:10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
912:10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
890:10:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
867:10:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
833:10:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
795:05:41, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
781:21:59, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
760:10:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
737:10:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
709:10:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
693:11:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
671:11:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
636:08:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
618:23:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
592:23:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
566:11:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
542:10:56, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
527:10:36, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
508:11:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
481:23:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
451:10:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
428:08:56, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
410:23:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
379:08:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
364:06:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
333:06:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
302:06:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
268:06:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
238:06:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
179:07:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
161:05:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
145:07:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
122:00:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
90:00:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
31:featured article nomination
10:
3321:
1218:It might be accurate, but
1021:, but its actual title is
3287:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
2006:Support from Gog the Mild
603:British Army of the Rhine
3301:Please do not modify it.
3247:Penny for your thoughts?
3205:Penny for your thoughts?
3071:Penny for your thoughts?
3032:Penny for your thoughts?
36:Please do not modify it.
3105:The paragraph starting
2609:Three comebacks above.
1453:nuclear weapons-capable
2966:Comment from Noswall59
2850:Support from Hawkeye7
2710:, spot checks below:
678:Nuclear powered ships
652:reading on this topic
386:The Falkland Islands
2664:Add archive URLs for
2043:Recusing to review.
2033:UndercoverClassicist
1973:UndercoverClassicist
1944:UndercoverClassicist
1931:UndercoverClassicist
1911:UndercoverClassicist
1883:UndercoverClassicist
1820:UndercoverClassicist
1789:UndercoverClassicist
1653:UndercoverClassicist
1526:UndercoverClassicist
1346:member of parliament
1254:UndercoverClassicist
1154:UndercoverClassicist
1119:UndercoverClassicist
1049:UndercoverClassicist
776:UndercoverClassicist
704:UndercoverClassicist
631:UndercoverClassicist
522:UndercoverClassicist
423:UndercoverClassicist
374:UndercoverClassicist
64:) 17 September 2024
1316:the conservative MP
1107:official historians
1087:official historians
1037:and so on, but per
820:or similar needed.
532:during the winter.
494:risky than others.
105:and rightly deleted
2050:Added - it was 70
1348:: I would cut the
923:decided to confirm
1484:Argentine: added
92:
3312:
3303:
3288:
3279:
3273:
3270:, and leave the
3248:
3220:
3206:
3130:Easter egg links
3072:
3047:
3033:
2938:
2933:
2860:party to the NPT
2629:
2588:
2028:
1967:MOS:CONFORMTITLE
1947:
1877:MOS:CONFORMTITLE
1837:
1742:
1670:
1624:
1602:
1557:
1502:
1480:
1454:
1408:
1380:WP:EXTRAORDINARY
1373:
1347:
1317:
1291:
1199:
1110:
1017:in the field as
988:
983:
947:
920:
898:
875:
852:MOS:WORDSASWORDS
849:
841:
807:
745:
719:
700:More to follow.
679:
646:
600:
574:
552:
489:
463:
395:
341:
311:
276:
254:
250:
246:
79:
48:The article was
38:
3320:
3319:
3315:
3314:
3313:
3311:
3310:
3309:
3308:
3299:
3286:
3277:
3271:
3214:
3041:
3021:
2968:
2936:
2931:
2852:
2660:, my comments:
2654:
2623:
2582:
2178:Whoops! Fixed.
2022:
2008:
1941:
1835:
1740:
1664:
1622:
1603:: false title.
1600:
1555:
1500:
1478:
1452:
1406:
1371:
1337:
1315:
1294:MOS:SCAREQUOTES
1289:
1197:
1104:
986:
981:
945:
918:
896:
873:
847:
839:
805:
743:
717:
677:
644:
598:
572:
550:
487:
461:
385:
339:
308:
274:
252:
248:
244:
189:
76:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
3318:
3307:
3306:
3294:
3293:
3284:goes through.
3256:
3255:
3254:
3253:
3194:
3193:
3192:
3191:
3172:
3171:
3170:
3150:
3149:
3148:
3126:
3125:
3124:
3103:
3102:
3101:
3080:
3079:
3078:
3077:
3020:
3017:
3016:
3015:
3014:
3013:
2967:
2964:
2963:
2962:
2961:
2960:
2928:
2927:
2924:
2923:
2922:
2905:
2904:
2903:
2882:
2881:
2880:
2851:
2848:
2847:
2846:
2845:
2844:
2830:
2829:
2828:
2827:
2826:
2825:
2824:
2823:
2822:
2821:
2802:
2801:
2800:
2799:
2760:
2759:
2741:
2740:
2739:
2720:
2719:
2718:
2717:
2714:
2690:
2689:
2688:
2666:
2665:
2653:
2650:
2649:
2648:
2647:
2646:
2645:
2644:
2643:
2642:
2602:
2601:
2565:
2564:
2563:
2562:
2545:
2544:
2543:
2525:
2524:
2523:
2522:
2521:
2520:
2519:
2518:
2496:
2495:
2494:
2493:
2476:
2475:
2474:
2447:
2446:
2445:
2428:
2427:
2426:
2409:
2408:
2407:
2390:
2389:
2388:
2371:
2370:
2369:
2352:
2351:
2350:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2314:
2313:
2312:
2293:Similarly for
2291:
2290:
2289:
2272:
2271:
2270:
2253:
2252:
2251:
2230:
2229:
2228:
2211:
2210:
2209:
2192:
2191:
2190:
2173:
2172:
2171:
2154:
2153:
2152:
2135:
2134:
2133:
2115:
2114:
2113:
2112:
2111:
2110:
2109:
2108:
2085:
2084:
2083:
2082:
2064:
2063:
2062:
2041:
2040:
2007:
2004:
2003:
2002:
2001:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1981:
1980:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1919:
1918:
1873:
1872:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1833:
1832:
1831:
1830:
1829:
1828:
1827:
1797:
1796:
1782:
1781:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1716:
1715:
1714:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1662:
1661:
1660:
1646:
1645:
1620:
1619:
1618:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1579:MOS:CONFORMing
1575:
1574:
1573:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1335:
1334:
1333:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1262:
1261:
1243:
1242:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1162:
1161:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
993:
965:
964:
963:
943:
942:
941:
916:
915:
914:
894:
893:
892:
871:
870:
869:
837:
836:
835:
803:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
741:
740:
739:
698:
697:
696:
695:
675:
674:
673:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
621:
620:
596:
595:
594:
570:
569:
568:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
511:
510:
485:
484:
483:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
433:
432:
431:
430:
413:
412:
383:
382:
381:
367:
366:
337:
336:
335:
306:
305:
304:
272:
271:
270:
242:
241:
240:
215:
214:
207:
200:
188:
185:
184:
183:
182:
181:
149:
148:
147:
110:A-class review
94:
93:
80:Nominator(s):
75:
70:
69:
46:
45:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3317:
3305:
3302:
3296:
3295:
3292:
3289:
3283:
3276:
3269:
3265:
3261:
3258:
3257:
3252:
3249:
3243:
3242:
3237:
3234:
3233:
3232:
3228:
3224:
3218:
3213:
3212:
3211:
3210:
3207:
3201:
3200:
3190:
3186:
3182:
3177:
3176:
3173:
3169:
3165:
3161:
3157:
3156:
3154:
3151:
3147:
3143:
3139:
3134:
3133:
3131:
3127:
3123:
3119:
3115:
3111:
3110:
3108:
3104:
3100:
3096:
3092:
3088:
3087:
3085:
3082:
3081:
3076:
3073:
3067:
3066:
3061:
3060:
3059:
3055:
3051:
3045:
3040:
3039:
3038:
3037:
3034:
3028:
3027:
3012:
3008:
3004:
3000:
2999:
2998:
2994:
2990:
2986:
2985:
2984:
2982:
2978:
2974:
2959:
2955:
2951:
2947:
2946:
2945:
2944:
2943:
2942:
2939:
2934:
2925:
2921:
2917:
2913:
2909:
2908:
2906:
2902:
2898:
2894:
2889:
2888:
2887:
2883:
2879:
2875:
2871:
2866:
2865:
2864:
2861:
2857:
2856:
2855:
2843:
2839:
2835:
2832:
2831:
2820:
2816:
2812:
2808:
2807:
2806:
2805:
2804:
2803:
2798:
2794:
2790:
2786:
2782:
2778:
2777:
2776:
2772:
2768:
2764:
2763:
2762:
2761:
2758:
2754:
2750:
2747:now, cheers.
2746:
2742:
2738:
2734:
2730:
2726:
2725:
2724:
2723:
2722:
2721:
2715:
2712:
2711:
2709:
2705:
2704:
2703:
2699:
2695:
2691:
2687:
2683:
2679:
2675:
2674:
2672:
2671:
2670:
2663:
2662:
2661:
2659:
2652:Source review
2641:
2637:
2633:
2627:
2622:
2621:
2620:
2616:
2612:
2608:
2607:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2600:
2596:
2592:
2586:
2581:
2580:
2579:
2578:
2574:
2570:
2567:Classy work.
2561:
2557:
2553:
2549:
2548:
2546:
2542:
2538:
2534:
2530:
2529:
2527:
2526:
2517:
2513:
2509:
2505:
2504:
2502:
2501:
2500:
2499:
2498:
2497:
2492:
2488:
2484:
2480:
2479:
2477:
2473:
2469:
2465:
2460:
2456:
2451:
2450:
2448:
2444:
2440:
2436:
2432:
2431:
2429:
2425:
2421:
2417:
2413:
2412:
2410:
2406:
2402:
2398:
2394:
2393:
2391:
2387:
2383:
2379:
2375:
2374:
2372:
2368:
2364:
2360:
2356:
2355:
2353:
2349:
2345:
2341:
2337:
2336:
2334:
2330:
2326:
2322:
2318:
2317:
2315:
2311:
2307:
2303:
2299:
2298:
2296:
2292:
2288:
2284:
2280:
2276:
2275:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2261:
2257:
2256:
2254:
2250:
2246:
2242:
2238:
2237:
2235:
2231:
2227:
2223:
2219:
2215:
2214:
2212:
2208:
2204:
2200:
2196:
2195:
2193:
2189:
2185:
2181:
2177:
2176:
2174:
2170:
2166:
2162:
2158:
2157:
2155:
2151:
2147:
2143:
2139:
2138:
2136:
2132:
2128:
2124:
2120:
2119:
2117:
2116:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2095:
2094:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2088:
2087:
2086:
2081:
2077:
2073:
2068:
2067:
2065:
2061:
2057:
2053:
2049:
2048:
2046:
2045:
2044:
2039:
2036:
2035:
2034:
2026:
2021:
2020:
2019:
2017:
2013:
1997:
1993:
1989:
1985:
1984:
1983:
1982:
1979:
1976:
1975:
1974:
1968:
1964:
1961:
1960:
1959:
1955:
1951:
1945:
1940:
1939:
1938:
1937:
1934:
1933:
1932:
1917:
1914:
1913:
1912:
1906:
1905:
1904:
1900:
1896:
1891:
1890:
1889:
1886:
1885:
1884:
1878:
1875:
1874:
1871:
1867:
1863:
1859:
1858:
1856:
1852:
1848:
1844:
1840:
1839:
1834:
1826:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1815:
1814:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1795:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1784:
1783:
1780:
1776:
1772:
1768:
1767:
1765:
1761:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1744:
1739:
1735:
1731:
1727:
1723:
1722:
1720:
1717:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1700:
1699:
1697:
1694:Luard gets a
1693:
1689:
1685:
1681:
1677:
1676:
1674:
1668:
1663:
1659:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1648:
1647:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1631:
1630:
1628:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1604:
1599:
1595:
1591:
1587:
1583:
1582:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1564:
1560:
1559:
1554:
1546:
1542:
1538:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1514:
1510:
1505:
1504:
1499:
1495:
1491:
1487:
1483:
1482:
1477:
1473:
1469:
1465:
1461:
1460:
1458:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1434:
1433:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1411:
1410:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1388:
1387:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1353:
1351:
1345:
1341:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1320:
1319:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1297:
1295:
1288:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1260:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1249:
1245:
1244:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1228:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1202:
1201:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1179:
1175:
1171:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1160:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1149:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1114:
1108:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1088:
1084:
1083:
1081:
1077:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1006:
1002:
998:
994:
992:
989:
984:
977:
976:
974:
970:
966:
962:
958:
954:
950:
949:
944:
940:
936:
932:
927:
926:
924:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
900:
895:
891:
887:
883:
878:
877:
872:
868:
864:
860:
856:
855:
853:
845:
838:
834:
830:
826:
822:
821:
819:
815:
811:
804:
796:
792:
788:
784:
783:
782:
779:
778:
777:
771:
767:
763:
762:
761:
757:
753:
748:
747:
742:
738:
734:
730:
726:
725:
723:
716:
715:
714:
711:
710:
707:
706:
705:
694:
690:
686:
682:
681:
676:
672:
668:
664:
660:
659:
657:
653:
650:
643:
637:
634:
633:
632:
625:
624:
623:
622:
619:
615:
611:
607:
606:
604:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
580:
578:
571:
567:
563:
559:
555:
554:
549:
543:
539:
535:
530:
529:
528:
525:
524:
523:
517:
513:
512:
509:
505:
501:
496:
495:
493:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
469:
467:
460:
452:
448:
444:
439:
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
429:
426:
425:
424:
417:
416:
415:
414:
411:
407:
403:
398:
397:
393:
389:
384:
380:
377:
376:
375:
369:
368:
365:
361:
357:
353:
352:
350:
345:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
321:
319:
315:
307:
303:
299:
295:
290:
289:
287:
286:Terence Lewin
283:
281:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
256:
243:
239:
235:
231:
227:
226:
224:
220:
219:
218:
212:
208:
205:
201:
198:
194:
193:
192:
180:
176:
172:
168:
164:
163:
162:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
133:
131:
130:
129:
128:
124:
123:
119:
115:
111:
106:
101:
99:
98:Falklands War
91:
87:
83:
78:
77:
74:
68:
66:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
3300:
3297:
3260:Closing note
3259:
3240:
3235:
3198:
3195:
3152:
3106:
3083:
3064:
3025:
3022:
2969:
2929:
2859:
2853:
2744:
2667:
2655:
2626:Gog the Mild
2611:Gog the Mild
2585:Gog the Mild
2569:Gog the Mild
2566:
2458:
2454:
2294:
2233:
2042:
2032:
2030:
2025:Gog the Mild
2012:Gog the Mild
2009:
1972:
1970:
1962:
1930:
1928:
1926:
1910:
1908:
1882:
1880:
1819:
1817:
1788:
1786:
1763:
1695:
1666:
1652:
1650:
1626:
1525:
1523:
1429:
1383:
1375:
1349:
1344:Conservative
1343:
1340:Labour Party
1339:
1253:
1251:
1247:
1192:
1153:
1151:
1147:
1118:
1116:
1112:
1079:
1048:
1046:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
996:
972:
968:
922:
817:
813:
775:
773:
772:or similar?
769:
765:
713:A few more:
712:
703:
701:
699:
655:
649:very limited
630:
628:
521:
519:
515:
491:
465:
422:
420:
391:
387:
373:
371:
348:
343:
317:
313:
280:professional
279:
216:
210:
203:
190:
127:Image review
126:
125:
102:
95:
49:
47:
35:
28:
3241:HJ Mitchell
3217:HJ Mitchell
3199:HJ Mitchell
3065:HJ Mitchell
3044:HJ Mitchell
3026:HJ Mitchell
2234:Fort Austin
1719:Ward Wilson
1148:independent
1080:independent
1039:WP:NOTPAPER
1019:Proceedings
1015:referred to
997:Proceedings
969:Proceedings
770:by invasion
766:recapturing
577:MOS:FIGURES
464:: consider
135:Fixed both
54:David Fuchs
2834:Matarisvan
2789:Matarisvan
2749:Matarisvan
2694:Matarisvan
1224:WP:SYNTHed
1031:Arch. Eph.
921:: suggest
647:: from my
344:impossible
318:post facto
314:Resolution
153:Nikkimaria
3268:WP:FAC/ar
3264:candidate
2973:Noswall59
2937:(discuss)
1764:Sheffield
1577:Consider
1556:T.V. Paul
987:(discuss)
223:WP:WEASEL
3262:: This
3158:Tweaked
2932:Hawkeye7
2295:Resource
1746:Tweaked
1678:Tweaked
1673:MOS:SAID
1457:MOS:DASH
1376:Guardian
982:Hawkeye7
810:MOS:SAID
722:MOS:DASH
516:superior
392:has been
310:question
211:strictly
204:slightly
50:promoted
3236:Support
1963:Support
1724:Added.
1669:that...
1043:WP:MTAU
656:illegal
167:in 1982
3223:Nick-D
3181:Nick-D
3160:Nick-D
3138:Nick-D
3114:Nick-D
3091:Nick-D
3050:Nick-D
3003:Nick-D
2989:Nick-D
2950:Nick-D
2912:Nick-D
2893:Nick-D
2870:Nick-D
2811:Nick-D
2781:Nick-D
2767:Nick-D
2729:Nick-D
2708:Nick-D
2678:Nick-D
2658:Nick-D
2632:Nick-D
2591:Nick-D
2552:Nick-D
2533:Nick-D
2508:Nick-D
2483:Nick-D
2464:Nick-D
2435:Nick-D
2416:Nick-D
2397:Nick-D
2378:Nick-D
2359:Nick-D
2357:Fixed
2340:Nick-D
2321:Nick-D
2302:Nick-D
2279:Nick-D
2260:Nick-D
2241:Nick-D
2218:Nick-D
2199:Nick-D
2180:Nick-D
2161:Nick-D
2159:Fixed
2142:Nick-D
2123:Nick-D
2098:Nick-D
2072:Nick-D
2052:Nick-D
1988:Nick-D
1950:Nick-D
1895:Nick-D
1862:Nick-D
1843:Nick-D
1804:Nick-D
1771:Nick-D
1748:Nick-D
1726:Nick-D
1704:Nick-D
1680:Nick-D
1635:Nick-D
1627:expert
1608:Nick-D
1606:Fixed
1586:Nick-D
1563:Nick-D
1561:Fixed
1537:Nick-D
1509:Nick-D
1486:Nick-D
1464:Nick-D
1438:Nick-D
1414:Nick-D
1412:Fixed
1392:Nick-D
1357:Nick-D
1323:Nick-D
1301:Nick-D
1269:Nick-D
1232:Nick-D
1206:Nick-D
1170:Nick-D
1133:Nick-D
1113:needed
1092:Nick-D
1060:Nick-D
1001:Nick-D
953:Nick-D
931:Nick-D
904:Nick-D
882:Nick-D
859:Nick-D
825:Nick-D
818:stated
787:Nick-D
752:Nick-D
729:Nick-D
685:Nick-D
663:Nick-D
610:Nick-D
584:Nick-D
558:Nick-D
534:Nick-D
500:Nick-D
473:Nick-D
466:retake
443:Nick-D
402:Nick-D
356:Nick-D
349:didn't
325:Nick-D
294:Nick-D
260:Nick-D
230:Nick-D
171:Nick-D
137:Nick-D
114:Nick-D
82:Nick-D
58:FACBot
3019:Harry
2910:Done
2868:war.
2676:Done
2433:Done
2414:Done
2300:Done
2239:Done
2236:was.
2216:Done
2096:Done
1667:noted
1584:Done
1462:Done
1355:Done
1350:Party
1321:Done
1299:Done
1058:Done
951:Done
857:Done
844:MOS:'
823:Done
814:noted
727:Done
661:Done
471:Done
323:Done
16:<
3227:talk
3185:talk
3164:talk
3142:talk
3118:talk
3095:talk
3054:talk
3007:talk
2993:talk
2977:talk
2954:talk
2916:talk
2897:talk
2874:talk
2838:talk
2815:talk
2793:talk
2785:here
2771:talk
2753:talk
2745:pass
2733:talk
2698:talk
2682:talk
2636:talk
2615:talk
2595:talk
2573:talk
2556:talk
2537:talk
2512:talk
2487:talk
2468:talk
2455:what
2439:talk
2420:talk
2401:talk
2382:talk
2363:talk
2344:talk
2325:talk
2306:talk
2283:talk
2264:talk
2245:talk
2222:talk
2203:talk
2184:talk
2165:talk
2146:talk
2127:talk
2102:talk
2076:talk
2056:talk
2016:talk
1992:talk
1954:talk
1899:talk
1866:talk
1847:talk
1808:talk
1775:talk
1752:talk
1730:talk
1708:talk
1684:talk
1639:talk
1612:talk
1590:talk
1567:talk
1541:talk
1513:talk
1490:talk
1468:talk
1442:talk
1430:that
1418:talk
1396:talk
1384:some
1361:talk
1338:the
1327:talk
1305:talk
1273:talk
1236:talk
1210:talk
1174:talk
1137:talk
1096:talk
1064:talk
1041:and
1035:TPhS
1027:BMCR
1005:talk
957:talk
935:talk
908:talk
886:talk
863:talk
829:talk
791:talk
756:talk
733:talk
689:talk
667:talk
614:talk
588:talk
562:talk
538:talk
504:talk
492:more
477:talk
447:talk
406:talk
360:talk
329:talk
298:talk
282:head
264:talk
234:talk
175:talk
157:talk
141:talk
118:talk
86:talk
62:talk
56:via
3282:bot
2656:Hi
2459:why
1696:lot
1671:}:
1665:He
1248:say
251:or
52:by
3278:}}
3272:{{
3244:|
3229:)
3202:|
3187:)
3166:)
3144:)
3120:)
3097:)
3068:|
3056:)
3029:|
3009:)
2995:)
2983:.
2979:)
2956:)
2918:)
2899:)
2876:)
2840:)
2817:)
2795:)
2773:)
2755:)
2735:)
2700:)
2684:)
2638:)
2617:)
2597:)
2575:)
2558:)
2539:)
2514:)
2489:)
2470:)
2441:)
2422:)
2403:)
2384:)
2365:)
2346:)
2327:)
2308:)
2297:.
2285:)
2266:)
2247:)
2224:)
2205:)
2186:)
2167:)
2148:)
2129:)
2104:)
2078:)
2058:)
1994:)
1956:)
1901:)
1868:)
1849:)
1810:)
1777:)
1754:)
1732:)
1710:)
1686:)
1641:)
1614:)
1592:)
1569:)
1543:)
1515:)
1492:)
1470:)
1459:)
1444:)
1420:)
1398:)
1363:)
1329:)
1307:)
1296:.
1275:)
1238:)
1212:)
1176:)
1139:)
1098:)
1066:)
1033:,
1029:,
1007:)
975:?
959:)
937:)
910:)
888:)
865:)
854:.
842::
831:)
812::
808::
793:)
758:)
735:)
720::
691:)
669:)
616:)
590:)
564:)
540:)
506:)
479:)
449:)
408:)
388:is
362:)
331:)
320:?
300:)
266:)
255:.
236:)
187:UC
177:)
159:)
143:)
120:)
88:)
67:.
33:.
3225:(
3219::
3215:@
3196:—
3183:(
3162:(
3140:(
3116:(
3093:(
3052:(
3046::
3042:@
3005:(
2991:(
2975:(
2952:(
2914:(
2895:(
2872:(
2836:(
2813:(
2791:(
2769:(
2751:(
2731:(
2706:@
2696:(
2680:(
2634:(
2628::
2624:@
2613:(
2593:(
2587::
2583:@
2571:(
2554:(
2535:(
2510:(
2485:(
2466:(
2437:(
2418:(
2399:(
2380:(
2361:(
2342:(
2323:(
2304:(
2281:(
2262:(
2243:(
2220:(
2201:(
2182:(
2163:(
2144:(
2125:(
2100:(
2074:(
2054:(
2027::
2023:@
2014:(
1990:(
1952:(
1946::
1942:@
1897:(
1864:(
1845:(
1806:(
1773:(
1750:(
1728:(
1706:(
1682:(
1637:(
1610:(
1588:(
1565:(
1539:(
1511:(
1488:(
1466:(
1440:(
1416:(
1394:(
1359:(
1325:(
1303:(
1271:(
1234:(
1208:(
1172:(
1135:(
1094:(
1062:(
1003:(
955:(
933:(
906:(
884:(
861:(
827:(
789:(
754:(
731:(
687:(
665:(
612:(
586:(
560:(
536:(
502:(
475:(
445:(
404:(
358:(
327:(
296:(
262:(
232:(
173:(
155:(
139:(
116:(
84:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.