Talk:1st Airborne Division (United Kingdom)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article1st Airborne Division (United Kingdom) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star1st Airborne Division (United Kingdom) is the main article in the 1st Airborne Division (United Kingdom) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 1, 2011Good article nomineeListed
October 29, 2011Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Page move[edit]

Just to let everyone here know why, I moved the page (Airborne -> Airbourne) to conform with WP:ENGVAR. Since this is a British military article, it should use British English. I'm sure there wouldn't be many American paratroopers happy with 82nd Airbourne Division (United States) :). Parsecboy (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ive never seen it spelt like this and even British sources (i.e. the Offical Campaign history) spells the divisions name (as well as the 6th) Airborne not Airbourne.

The Army: http://www.army.mod.uk/para/ also spells it Airborne as do other websites such as the http://www.pegasusarchive.org/ --EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: One should note this spelling of the word does not show up as a legimate version of the word in the Oxford or Cambridge dictionaries.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's surprising. I guess we should defer to the spelling in the official histories. Good catch, Enigma. Parsecboy (talk) 00:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected all the misspellings of airborne in the article as well.--DavidCane (talk) 23:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]