Talk:Clement Attlee
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Clement Attlee is part of the Cold War WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Cold War on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to the people, places, things, and events, and anything else associated with the Cold War. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage. | ||
This sentence:
"He attended Churchill's funeral in January 1965 - elderly and frail by then, he had to remain seated in the freezing cold as the coffin was carried, having tired himself out by standing at the rehearsal the previous day - and died of pneumonia on 8 October 1967"
Jarred badly with me. Attlee's own death seems to be thrown in almost as an afterthought in a sentence about Churchill's funeral, and would seem to me to be more suitable for an article about Churchill. If Attlee died as a direct result of the "freezing cold" he endured at the funeral, then ok, but I'd rather it was stated clearly as such (and I've not investigated it myself, but I doubt this was the case).
Photos of Attlee huddled forlornly on a chair at Churchill's funeral are often printed. I don't think it's related to his own death over 2 years later though.
Someone needs to change the picture of atlee its a terrible one
No time to add this now as I'm off to bed, but here is Atlee's cabinet. Need
Lord President: Herbert Morrison 1945-1951, Viscount Addison 1951-1951
Lord Chancellor:Lord Jowitt 1945-1951
Privy Secretary:Arthur Greenwood 1945-1947, Lord Inman 1947-1947, Viscount Addison 1947-1951, Ernest Bevin 1951-1951, Richard Stokes 1951-1951
Chancellor of the Exch.: Hugh Dalton 1945-1947, Stafford Cripps 1947-1950, Hugh Gaitskell 1950-1951
Foreign Secretary: Ernest Bevin 1945-1951; Herbert Morrison 1951-1951
Home Secretary: James Chuter Ede 1945-1951
Admiralty: A. V. Alexander 1945-1946
Agriculture: Tom Williams 1945-1951
Air: Viscount Stansgate 1945-1946
Civil Aviation: Lord Pakenham 1948-1950
Colonial Office: George Hall 1945-1946, Arthur Creech Jones 1946-1950, Jim Griffiths 1950-1951
Commonwealth Relations: Viscount Addison 1947-1947, Phillip Noel-Baker 1947-1950, Patrick Gordon-Walker 1950-1951
Defence: Clement Attlee 1945-1946, A. V. Alexander 1946-1950, Emmanuel Shinwell 1950-1951
Dominion Office: Viscount Addison 1945-1947
Education: Ellen Wilkinson 1945-1947, George Tomlinson 1947-1951
Fuel and Power: Emmanuel Shinwell 1945-1947
Health: Aneurin Bevan 1945-1951
India Office: Lord Pethick-Lawrence 1945-1947, Earl Listowel 1947-1948
Labour and National Serv: George Isaacs 1945-1951, Aneurin Bevan 1951-1951, Alfred Robens 1951-1951
Paymaster General: Arthur Greenwood 1946-1947, Viscount Addison 1948-1949
Cab Min without Portfolio: A. V. Alexander 1946-1946, Arthur Greenwood 1947-1947
Scottish Office: Joseph Westwood 1945-1947, Arthur Woodburn 1947-1950, Hector McNeil 1950-1951
Town and Country Planning: Hugh Dalton 1950-1951
Trade (Board of): Stafford Cripps 1945-1947, Harold Wilson 1947-1951, Hartley Shawcross 1951-1951
War Office: Jack Lawson 1945-1946
Contents |
[edit] Postnominals
I disagree with the FRS post-nominal. This is context-dependent, just as BA, MA, PhD, MD, JP, etc are context-dependent. It is usual, in my experience of encyclopedias, to show only PNLs that relate to honours and awards, not those that relate to educational attainment or membership of learned societies. If this were not so, certain persons would have very long lists of PNLs indeed. Attlee's fellowship of the Royal Society, and the circumstances of this, should be mentioned in the text. Cheers JackofOz 04:21, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Hmm. Not sure. That someone is an FRS is an important reflection on their character overall, and is worthy of note. So... Hmm. Thoughts?
- James F. (talk) 04:56, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Jack (for once). Adam 05:15, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Now come on, Adam, be nice. JackofOz 22:34, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I think it IS given as an honour or award though. It is conferred by election, not exam or occupation making it quite differnt from the other examples listed above. Hence I think it should be there. Also Margaret Thatcher has her FRS listed so if we think they shouldn't be there we should remove it there.A Geek Tragedy 15:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- In fact now I think about it a bit more the "honours and awards only arguement" should take away PC rather than FRS since being made a cabinet minister makes one a privy councillor A Geek Tragedy 15:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Postnominals revisited
I've removed the FRS once again. It's simply inappropriate to put FRS, Ph.D, Ll.B, M.B., J.P. or similar things in a general reference. If Thatcher still has FRS after her name, I'll remove that one too.
I did remove the PC, but have since restored it. When he was a member of the House of Commons, PC would have been inappropriate after his name since the pre-nom "The Rt Hon" was sufficient to indicate his membership of the Privy Council. But once he became an Earl, he was The Rt Hon by virtue of that peerage, so PC is now necessary to show that he was also a member of the Privy Council. JackofOz 03:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re-edit
In addition to adding some material, I have taken the liberty of re-editing part of the article, in order to clean up the chronology and avoid unnecessary duplication. Nothing has been omitted.
--Train guard 15:19, 5 April 2006 (UT
[edit] Evaluation
Can someone say what, exactly, is objected to here? The evaluation is not particularly opinionated, and large parts of it are referenced.
--Train guard 11:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
- Given that no one has put forward any reason why they think the section is not NPOV as required by the notice, I am removing it. Dabbler 14:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Again, someone has seen fit to challenge the neutrality of this section. Why?
--Train guard 15:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
-Because it reads like a funeral oration? Geesh, talk about POV-tone.--Buckboard 07:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
You must go to some bloody odd funerals.
--Train guard 11:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Name
Does anyone know why his name is sometimes spelt Atlee? Is this just a mistake? If you type clement atlee in wikipedia you are redirected to attlees page--Ruddyell 17:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- This appears to be a common misspelling, particularly among non-Brits.
Bastie 18:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Correct, it is a common misspelling, like "Field Marshall"
[edit] Where is El Hanna?
- said; "where he was badly wounded at El Hanna" what's El Hanna ? UNSIGNED UNDATED
-
- The Battle of the Hanna --jmb 21:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Wasn't aware Attlee was at Kut. Just flicked through a biog (Francis Beckett) last night, said he was on the Sinai Front in 1916 after Gallipoli ended early that year. He briefly lost use of his legs after being wounded in the buttocks, and was sent back to UK. Confusion may be because General Maude, who was the last man off Gallipoli, (stepping into the boat commanded by Captain Attlee) was later the general who conquered Mesopotamia in 1917. Also the Burridge biog says he was at Kut but the coverage of WW1 is very thin and may just be a slipup. Somebody else might want to look into it (the best biog is Kenneth Harris but I don't have a copy to hand) but I don't think the article is correct as it stands.
[edit] Longest serving?
Paragraph 1 of this article states:
- "He was the longest-serving Labour Party leader in history (1946 - 1951)."
Hadn't this record been surpassed by Tony Blair (1997 - 2007)? Vonkje 23:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Folks are getting confused here. Attlee was longest-serving as Party Leader -- roughly twenty years (from mid-1930s to mid-1950s). But he served only about 6 years as prime minister. By contrast, Blair's time as leader (much shorter overall) was spent mostly in office. I've corrected the para too. Nandt1 02:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Why not Sir Clement?
Another user changed Attlee's title under the photo to Rt. Hon. Sir Clement Attlee. I have reverted this to Rt. Hon. Clement Attlee. Certainly he was never known as Sir Clement -- either Mr. (or Major) or later Earl. While I am no expert in these matters, the Dictionary of National Biography indicates that, although Attlee was in fact made a Knight of the Garter (KG) in 1956, this occurred after he had already been created Earl in 1955 (which I imagine would take priority over a knighthood). But I'm quite prepared to be corrected by a true expert in heraldry! Incidentally, perhaps such an expert will explain why his younger two daughters are here given the title of Lady and the eldest not. Nandt1 11:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- Because he was given a peerage, the lesser knighthood is no longer used. Attlee was given the Garter after the peerage, so he was never known as "Sir" because he was already known as "Lord Attlee". PeterSymonds 13:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vote in May, 1940
The article states:
"The disastrous Norwegian Campaign resulted in a vote of no confidence in the government [3]"
Actually, the government won the vote, but thirty Conservative MPs voted with the opposition on what was in effect a vote of confidence, and Neville Chamberlain's position was unsustainable. The BBC source is also inaccurate. Norvo 23:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I have clarified this in the main text.
--Train guard 10:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Introduction
I'm new to Wikipedia and cannot understand how someone can bluntly state that Attlee's time in power was "a Golden Age" for Britain. What if I said that Thatcher's time in office was "a Golden Age"? I'd be no less right...or wrong, would I? Can we remove it?TaxHaven 03:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
