h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

h5ringer for the encouragement.

When typing madam instead of miss nothing comes up so I'll stick with miss. Or are you saying you feel that the quote is unnecessary for madam would have more likely been said thus he never said it all..just thinking aloud here.

As for horses I'm not sure which one to ride...my options are?

No, I've no doubt he said something to someone. The only thing I'm sure about is he would have said *Miss* neither to Lady Astor nor to Bessie Braddock.

Choices for horses:

Churchill - British Wartime Prime Minister
Churchill - The Politician
Churchill - Historian, Writer and Painter
Churchill - a Great Briton

etc. etc.

But just ride one horse only

Opti, whoever he said it to, and I am sure he did, I feel sure it would have been Madam, said with some venom, and Madam fits the speech of that period better. Just an opinion but I have always seen it as Madam.

It's a big subject, well done. I wish I hadn't passed on the books I had chronicling his life and times. They would have helped.



Websailor

I think I was trying for 'Churchill - a Great Briton', although that sounds a little vague three sounds tempting 'Churchill - Historian, Writer and Painter'. for the

I'll change the quote

Right I've gone with 'Churchill - Historian, Writer and Painter'

Entry: Winston Churchill - British Prime Minister (An Overview) - A37334676



""I'd suggest he is worthy of 5 entries on his own.""
Quote from Mckay in AWW thread.

I think McKay is right. How it stands at the moment, there are far too many gaps, too many 'jumps' in time.

ST. MKII

Yes that's why I've entitled this piece 'Churchill - Historian, Writer and Painter - Part 1'

You don't seriously think slapping 'Part 1' on the end of the title makes this right do you? If you take the time to do the proper research you'll see, very quickly, just how deficient this is. Do a Google or Yahoo search and see what comes up and how Churchill is writtten about properly including the BBC's own History page.
I'll leave other's to comment further but for me this just doesn't cut it.

ST.

I suggest you remove this from PR for now, and work on the collection - as it where. As for the title, Painter? So he picked up a brush? Whoopee. I think he's got a few more talents far more important than that. PM, Ombudsman, Starving off the Effects of Sleep Deprivation...

He was not awarded the Nobel prize for literature as 'a token of gratitude'

Sorry Opti, this one will not fit into the quick bio category, it will be major piece of work to do Churchill - I considered it then looked at my 4 inch thick biography.

I agree with Matt.

Well I changed it in accordance with h5ringer's list aiming to work on one of them but it seems this is not what people want from an entry on the man and thus I have removed this from Peer Review.

I think the problem is that you have covered his whole life, from birth to death, but haven't covered everything in between. If you just want to write about him as a painter, you could do that, or if you wanted to write about his childhood and youth, you could do that too, but this entry seems to cover too much and not enough at the same time, if that makes any sense?

so perhaps just submitting the artistic bit on its own would be enough for one entry then?

No - I'd say an opening paragraph saying something about despite being best known as a politician Wiston Churchill despite his military background, and lack of academic qualification went achieved morte in the field of art, etc. Then I think you'd need to just write about his painting - how he started, his exhibitions, critical assessments of his work, etc.

"Oh heck I feel like I've opened a can of worms.."

Cheer up, it can only get worse .

I feel that Entry is a bit short and reads more like a tribute than a biography - it's too one-sided, not a warts-and-all portrait.

He was i)an infamous alcoholic

ii)an old-school imperialist bigot; amongst his most famous/notorious quotes is one labelling Gandhi a "half-naked Indian fakir.
-many Indians, too, like myself, have never forgotten how he stalled the country's independence in the House of Lords while India suffered the ravages of near-civil war

-iii)as incompetent in military strategy as his German counterpart. Twice the North African campaign could have been decided in the Allied favour and, twice, he bled much-needed troops to pointless and bloody sideshows in the Balkans (his seeming obsession, from Gallipoli, with the "soft underbelly of Europe which, after Anzio and Salerno, U.S. Gen. Mark Clark called "a tough old gut")

-iv) a masterful manipulator of opinion and propaganda.When Graf Spee's captain and crew scuttled their vessel in Montevideo, the event's significance was telescoped almost beyond recognition and Churchill had the ship's complement paraded down Whitehall as craven losing combatants.

Churchill was, without questio,n the man for the time ("Comes the hour...") but, in this day and age, history simply ca not gloss over his numerous faults as if they didn't exist.

Not sure if this is still something you feel you want to come back to, but there's a lot of material on the new Churchill archive site:

bbc.co.uk/archive/churchill

We'd have loved to have linked to an h2g2 entry on the man, but sadly, this is the nearest we ever got...