Talk:John Robyns/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Untitled
All feedback welcome.USMarine51 14:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Thankyou very much, User:Adamdaley. My English is problematic after 30 years of French language immersion. I fear that I am not very computer literate either. I hope that citation issue may be re-examined. Infobox sounds like a wonderful idea. Until now I have not yet seen an image or portrait of Major General John Robyns, KH, of the Royal Marines. A very dignified portrait of General Edward Nicolls, KCB, of the Royal Marines may be available at the Royal Marines Museum in Portsmouth. Portraits of other prominent nineteenth century Royal Marines also circulate on the net from time to time. Thankyou again, everyone, for feedback and contributions. USMarine51 00:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
- Since I do not know much about the article. I've assessed it as "Start". If there is anyone who has more knowledge of the article than I do, they may assess it as "B class". Keep up the good work USMarine51. Adamdaley (talk) 04:17, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
The historical evolution of British military and naval rank structure and nomenclature is rather complicated. The same may be said of American equivalents from the 18th century to the present. As a Royal Marines officer, John Robyns was a part of the Naval establishment, attained the field grade of Major in his proper Corps of Royal Marines, and was honored, both on the battlefield-and for long and faithful srvice, with honorary "Brevet" rank on the British Army list. I Think that I am pretty well informed about these complexities, having served as a Marine Corps officer myself. I am not in a good position to evaluate my own article, but I do think that John Robyns "is still on duty" and busily obliging me to explain the institutional setting from whence he came, while asking the question of just what may be considered "notable" or "important" in military history? Both Karl Marx (who enthusiastically reported events during the American Civil War) and Fernand Braudel analyzed such criteria as notability and importance as being matters of subjectivity, if not value judgements....Perhaps I degress?USMarine51 20:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by USMarine51 (talk • contribs)