Talk:Harry Patch

Is he the last Tommy, period?

"the last Tommy to fight in the trenches" Western Europe. I have read several items stating William Young is a "Tommy" - What is the differance. Would like to know. Thanks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.188.174 (talk • contribs)

A tommy would be a british soldier rather than say french.Geni 10:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. Do we have a ref for Tommy? it is in Kipling I am pretty sure, which puts it late 19th century, but he never wrote it originally. My Collins says C19 orig. Thomas Atkins, name representing typical private in specimin forms. That is true I think, but it clues me to think it was a cartoon in Punch (magazine) and am trying to place it. I have a lot of books on WWI cartoons and would be well before that but would probably trace back from there. SimonTrew (talk) 00:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hors de combat

The article says he was awarded the Hors de combat for awarded for outstanding bravery of servicemen, but the article it links to it not about a decoration but "soldiers who are incapable of performing their military function" does anyone have further information or a reference to clarify this?— Rod ^talk 21:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

If you Google "Hors de combat medal" or try http://www.awardmedals.com/index.php?cPath=37_36 you will see the medal Harry wears. It was given to him by his God daughter and he does cherish it, but strictly speaking, it is not an "Official" medal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boldlochinvar (talk • contribs) 18:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

OK but why did you delete the citation supporting the MA from Uni of Bristol & working on building the Wills Tower?— Rod ^talk 18:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Glad you're happy with the Hors de combat matter. Thanks for putting back the Uni of Bristol section. My mistake.

Just to clarify, it is a commemorative medal and my mistake was saying it was awarded as actually it is only what it signifies. It is not an official campaign medal as issued by the MoD medal office or foreign medals recognised by The Queen and shouldn't be worn at official functions (officially recognised medals go on the top row, and commemorative on the second row although Harry isn't strictly sticking to that when you look at his photos, if you want an example of how it is done look at bill stone). Saying that the Hors de Combat may well be recognised by a veterans association he may be a member of. RichyBoy (talk) 04:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Cause of death not stated

Old age itself is not a cause of death. Ykral (talk) 18:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Same argument made by another and replied (by me) on Henry Allingham. While true, since you die essentially of cardiac arrest or brain haemorrhage, we might as well scrub all the articles that say he died of liver failure or falling under a bus. Since it is patent nonsense to say so, and since it was quite common for a doctor to put down another cause if there was any doubt that an insurance would not be paid (e.g. for suicide, which insurance companies used to exclude), I think all we can do is go by the death certificate. And it may well be just "old age", but that is too early to say. SimonTrew (talk) 23:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe it matters that much. "Natural causes" would be wide enough to cover the situation, and I doubt there will be a post-mortem. All machines, including the human body, run out of steam sooner or later. It's a fact of life, and at his age, and mine, it's more likely than not, and scarcely worth the debate. Rodhullandemu 00:09, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I feel the exact cause is important for statistics and future research, especially when the human lifespan could soon reach 300 years or more and there are several immortality groups doing research. Other factors: there have been older men on the planet, and also this could be age discrimination if he is just written off as "an old man". Ykral (talk) 00:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure about "soon", but as far as I know the only assertions about immortality date from the Bible, which may or may not be a reliable source, but in the absence of contemporary evidence must be regarded as apocryphal. The supposed longevity claims from obscure regions of China and Russia tend to fall at the first hurdle due to the lack of reliable records, and that is the failure of Henry Jenkins (supercentenarian)'s claim, because there is no extant documentation that any historian would regard as reliable. There's no "age discrimination" here; I am, by some definitions, "an old man". But I don't consider myself gullible. Rodhullandemu 00:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can gather the Bible is a reliable source as a published, available, verifiable source. ObDeclaration: I am agnostic. It is also beautiful and some parts are worth quoting in relevant articles, if (and only if) it helps explain the article.

As for reliable records, agree (and Guinness World Records tends to take the same tack). Like it or not, women's ages are particularly unreliable in the real-world sense, though if they pass WP:V that is OK. Though I think it still falls on WP:N; I am 37 and 105 days and so is my brother but I don't think that particularly notable.

Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 01:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Old age is a primary cause of death in the event of no other problems, senescence as some would call it, it does happen and can be the only reason. However, I recall that Mr Patch suffered from an emphysema of some type so in all likelyhood it was related to that. Delving in beyond helps no-one; a subarachnoid hemorrhage can be a cause of death from a cerebal infarction which can be caused by an occipital fracture - what's the real cause of death? Being bludgeoned on the head with a blunt instrument, that's the real cause, and not the deeper mystery. RichyBoy (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Linking year of birth

An editor persists in linking Harry's year of birth. MOS:DOB does not show any dates of birth being linked. MOS:UNLINKYEARS states that years in articles should not be linked unless the link is germaine and topical to the article's subject matter. Take a look at Category:1898 births and you will see that few, if any, have just the year of birth linked.

I do not see how linking the year that Harry Patch was born is in any way relevant to the article. I won't revert the link if it is added again today because I don't want to fall foul of WP:3RR, so would ask the editor who keeps adding the link to refrain from doing so until it is discussed here.

NOTE: There is a side issue to do with date autoformatting and there is a hiatus in place on mass de-linking of autoformatted dates. That has nothing whatsoever to do with this issue. Date autoformatting e.g. 8 August 2009 used to be done on Wikpedia to ensure that dates display according to "my preferences" settings. In the category listed above you will find a number of articles with the full dates linked i.e. autoformatted. That is not is what under discussion here. --Simple Bob (talk) 18:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying that his birth year should be linked because he is a person, but because he was one of the oldest people in the world. Articles about supercentenarians often state events that took place in history and talk about the era they were born in. It's important for the reader to grasp what his lifespan entailed, considering that is the main reason for his notability. SiameseTurtle (talk) 22:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The major world events during his life are already well-represented in the article, nothing in his year of birth seems to particualrly improve understanding, saying he was born in the Victorian era would probably help understanding more than a link to a single yera. David Underdown (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Should there be a seperate article Harry Patch (In Memory Of)?

Isn't the song notable enough for its own article? It's by a very notable band, and it has received a fair bit of press coverage.--IHABihat (talk) 20:58, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Not yet. A look at WP:SONG for notability guidelines is recommended. Rodhullandemu 21:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Template issue

Could anyone suggest which template is best for these images?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Patch_Funeral1.JPG & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Patch_funeral2.JPG

Paulus Gun (talk) 19:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Holidays

The wisdom of Harry Patch.

When he was passed his 100th birthday Harry Patch was engaged by a Mans magazine as an "Agony Uncle" probably on the grounds that by then if he hadn't done it all he'd probably seen most of it.

A reader wrote in to say that "I'm fed up with following my friends to places like Cambodia. Can you suggest a good place for a holiday"?

The answer from Harry Patch was a classic. "I've always liked Weymouth".AT Kunene (talk) 12:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Tommy

My grandfather told me that in the build up towards the Battle of the Somme in 1916, lots of things changed in the military. The best known was the issue of steel helmets for the first time, as the central exchequer had taken over soldiers pay directly rather than via regimental funds a new army paybook was issued. The first specimen copies were filled out with the name "Tommy Atkins". The soldiery started calling themselves "Tommy" as did the Germans.

one definition of "Tommy" would be any soldier who served in WW1 between 1916 and the final peace treaty in 1919.AT Kunene (talk) 12:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Last Tommy Section

Under both the December 2004 and July 2007 paragraphs, the quotes, "calculated and condoned slaughter of human beings," and, "war isn't worth one life," are attributed to him. Is he known to have said the same thing twice on these occasions, or is one of them incorrect? —Sahjiarah (talk) 19:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Two issues

A couple of things about this article:

• Intrusive personal details sourced to Ancestry.com. Not sure why we need to know about his oldest son's alcoholism, and his estrangement from his second son. Understand "not censored" but the article's not about them. Also, is Ancestry an RS? I'd always thought it was user-generated.
• The structure's odd. Why is the 1998 documentary in Legacy? You end up with lots of details of things Mr Patch did while he was alive, appearing after the article's already covered his death. I'd suggest the sub-section be moved up. KJP1 (talk) 10:21, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

I've addressed both of these. Happy to discuss, of course. KJP1 (talk) 10:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that ancestry.com is not regarded as a good source as it is a mostly a mixture of user-generated and primary source material, which also requires registration/ subscription. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC)