War Diaries Talk

[IMPROVEMENT] Additional types and fields in tags (merged topics)

  • pawcards by pawcards

    Can there be a tag for work that is to do with road making, track laying, etc - just putting 'other' does not convey anything. Trench building or repairing does not cover it.
    Wonderful project - I'm hooked!

    Posted

  • ftm42 by ftm42

    Hooked too - must try to get some real work done today!

    Could we have a general 'comments' tag as I've just found "troops rather bored"!

    Posted

  • ftm42 by ftm42

    Could we include these somewhere to capture moods eg "Troops rather bored" as I have just found on one diary page!

    Posted

  • richardlight by richardlight

    When doing a diary page, officers are mentioned as leading an activity of a group of soldiers (e.g. a troop movement). Yet the "roles" that are offered relate to them as individuals. Do we record the person at all in such cases, and if so should the role be left blank?

    Posted

  • Andrew_Stevenson by Andrew_Stevenson

    It needs a "drill" option for unit activity too. From pages I've looked at they still did plenty of square bashing while not getting killed on the front line.

    Posted

  • CoxJul by CoxJul

    I am tagging a field ambulance unit and find many of the tags not very helpful for their context.

    Posted

  • sji2006 by sji2006

    Many diaries reference the route of movement, which are not necessarily locations, but often "city-city" or code names for roads. As of now, there is not an existing tag for this. Maybe a route tag would help?

    Posted

  • Andys320 by Andys320

    How about having options for Drafts Arriving plus ability to specify numbers of officers/men?

    Addition of the classification 'support' to 'in the line', 'attacking' etc

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    A few more I have found it would be nice to have the option to tag specifically

    1. Units in reserve
    2. Temporary transfers of personnel
    3. Temporary command for officers
    4. Fatigue parties
    5. Mines and other explosions set off by own side
    6. Damage to trenches or other fortifications

    Is anyone from the project actually reading this forum today? We don't seem to be getting many responses from anyone official...

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    And another one. I keep coming across really detailed descriptions of the Unit's disposition on the ground (i.e. exactly how the Companies of the Battalion are organised), but there is nothing to tag this with. For people looking for info in War Diaries, knowing where a particular Company was during a period of time can be crucial information.

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    And another one. When a unit opens fire with rifle grenades or trench mortars, it's not really an "attack" so there is no way of tagging it except with "other"

    Posted

  • debcam by debcam

    To be able to tag a comment written in the diary about a named person to that tagged person
    To be able to specify a number that included both dead and wounded - i had "146 dead or wounded"
    To add "searching for dead and wounded" or burying dead or wounded to unit activity
    ?Morale of troops
    If the word "other" is ever tagged under any category - the chance to actually specify what the "other" activity etc is?

    Posted

  • Will_F by Will_F

    To be able to choose a type-in box in casualties, often a numerical description is missing in the diary and only 'casualties were slight' is given

    Posted

  • Will_F by Will_F

    For example is the enemy:
    Retreating
    Advancing
    Shelling with high explosive
    shelling with shrapnel

    rather than just a generic 'enemy activity' tag

    Posted

  • catswhiskerscats by catswhiskerscats

    When tagging "Unit Activity" there is nothing for "Patrol" which surely is a major part of a unit activity?

    Posted

  • danberto by danberto

    I've found that often men have been involved in work such as wiring or bringing up supplies. This is clearly not digging or improving trenches so I've tended to tag it as 'other'.

    I would like there to be specific tags for the type of work being carried out as some types of work, i.e. wiring are potentially more dangerous than others, i.e. moving up supplies.

    Posted

  • pmj by pmj

    Currently these are LEFT, RIGHT and OTHER. Useful additional tags would be SUPPORT and RESERVE.

    Posted

  • charcinders by charcinders

    I just completed my first page. Some improvements I would suggest are:
    Default person type maybe should be commanding officer, not author of diary. Almost every person I've seen referred to has been a CO, who I have to classify as "Other".
    If it remembered a list of all the people and places you have already entered, it would save time.

    Posted

  • GregS by GregS

    I am also seeing a lot of reference sto "cleaning up", normally cleaning up the camp. I suspect there would be a lot of time spent getting camps cleaned up. Maybe a category of "camp maintenance", which would include setting up, tidying, improving, etc etc.

    Posted

  • Swanage_Belle by Swanage_Belle

    for example - I have started to see lots of gas attacks, but there are no tags to cover these. I have been using 'enemy activity' but it really doesn't cover it. also men are being sent to hospital with gas related injuries which is very different from being 'wounded'

    Posted

  • glindsay by glindsay

    Suggest including an activity heading entitled 'Clearing/burying dead men and horses' Seems a recurring activity for several units

    Posted

  • alison.aitken by alison.aitken

    Can we have categories for horses- number injured; illnesses eg mange; number put down and sold to butchery. Alos a job title- 'horsekeeper'- or have I missed these in the selections available? Reference is also made to field hospitals which are number- how can they be recorded as places? Mention is made of staff illneses- again can tehre some freetext used to record these?
    Thank you

    Posted

  • InThePink by InThePink

    A tag for Working Parties would be good, can't see any way to tag that at the moment

    Posted

  • mrjackoboy by mrjackoboy

    I have been tagging 'cleaning' as 'hygiene' and where it just says 'working' I use 'other'

    Clarification would be useful indeed

    Posted

  • JOsment by JOsment

    I've been tagging a diary for a Royal Engineers division. This is just one day's work for 4 sections:
    "Clearing cellars (for accommodation) and overhauling WELDON TRESTLE gear.
    Erecting NISSEN huts at WANQUETIN.
    Fitting out 76th Brigade HQ dugouts and strengthening tunnels.
    Laying light tramway track.
    Making kitchens for 76th Brigade HQ dugouts and strengthening tunnel.
    Repairing (sewer pipe?) from Barrack Yard to town sewer.
    Forming advance Brigade dump of RE stores for forthcoming operations."

    It seems somewhat derogatory to just tag all this effort, which went on for several days, as digging or improving trenches, or Other.

    I would have thought that the light tramway would have been of particular interest.

    Posted

  • JOsment by JOsment

    That's it - I've had enough of this. I've just typed in the above comment and tried to go back to my page and it's gone. I can't be bothered to waste any more time on this. Sorry - good luck to all you more patient people!

    Posted

  • nickb55 by nickb55

    Time
    Impossible to record midday or midnight correctly as always have to use "AM" or "PM". This could be very confusing. I've been tagging as 11:59 AM for midday and 11:59 PM for midnight but this isn't ideal.

    Also for time, would it be possible to link the time tag in some way to the event which it refers to?

    Unit activity

    • artillery activity (by both sides)
    • preparations for attack

    Person
    visiting (eg top brass)

    Weather
    lots of days are described as both "fine" and "cold". This means two tags at the moment. Maybe the weather could be more of a checkbox selection so multiple elements can be picked out

    Casualties
    While officers are always accounted for separately (and usually named), other ranks are often lumped together, especially in major battles. I have a day on the Somme in October 1916 where the text is "150 OR killed, wounded or missing". This clearly can't be categorized. Maybe we can have an additional combined category of "KWM"

    Posted

  • julianbarker by julianbarker

    I agree that veterinary units are difficult to record. As for Field Hospitals, are they not units?

    Posted

  • johnohowson by johnohowson

    Is it possible to distinguish between British and German and possibly French and Indian troops in casualty lists from Field Ambulances?

    Posted

  • Katybb by Katybb

    If a causality is named, should they be tagged twice- as a named person (with reason injured/killed) and as a causality... Or just one of those?

    Posted

  • spof by spof moderator

    Record him twice. That way you can search on his date of death as well as the number of casualties in the unit.

    Posted

  • Phil_Evans by Phil_Evans

    The midnight/midday thing is right. I'm using 12.00am as midnight and 12.00pm as midday - is everyone using the same convention? Also I cannot get the minutes to 'stick', I enter a time 6 30 AM and when the tag is saved it reverts to 6 00 AM?
    In the modern (ok - 30 years ago) army 12:00 is midday and there is no midnight - you record 23:59 or 00:01. The 00:00 is obviously a confusing nonsense time and the army very kindly gives you this minute off!

    Posted

  • Phil_Evans by Phil_Evans

    I have come across a few entries 'Injured in accident' - Wounded is the best match but obviously not a war casualty as such? Should there be a separate category.

    Posted

  • angiehart by angiehart

    The tags don't seem to fit for the Royal Engineers either. They are sinking wells for water supply, or fitting out bunks for billeting or building shelters - I'm not sure what I tag these under, 'other' doesn't seem to cover it.

    Posted

  • jmkwon by jmkwon

    Same for this supply column I'm following, "other" or "unit movement" doesn't seem a sufficient description for its resupply activities (then again, observation might be too dull for historians). I guess I'll just use hashtags for now.

    Posted

  • johntxic by johntxic

    New activity should be added.

    Posted

  • CoachRob22 by CoachRob22

    I only started this afternoon but the first pages carried casualty number reports where the entry either said 'gassed' or 'wounded (gassed)' It would be helpful to have a section in the drop down description for those wounded who were gassed

    Posted

  • khearn by khearn

    Yeah, I've only done a few diary pages, but have seen a lot of fatigue party reports. If they mention working on tranches, I use the digging/repairing tranches tag, but other than that I'm not sure what to do with them. Should I ignore them, mark then as unit activity/other or something else?

    Posted

  • khearn by khearn

    I'd classify drill as training.

    Posted

  • khearn by khearn

    I'm also not sure what to put when the diary reports that our artillery was firing. unit activity/attacking sounds like the unit keeping the diary was attacking.

    Posted

  • M.I. by M.I.

    Friendly fire is problematic, too. Both under person and casualties are no proper items to tag. In the case i have, the death by friendly fire occured at relief, not even combat.

    Posted

  • simonedi by simonedi moderator

    thats a weird one... any details on what happened?

    Posted

  • Malarkey56 by Malarkey56

    The diaries I am dealing with record "To Hospital #" and "from Hospital #" (where # = number). I have assumed To Hospital is the same as "Sick", as Wounded are listed separately. But there is no mechanism for recording those returning from Hospital. There are more to/from hospital than wounded and KIA. (Winter 1915)

    Posted

  • M.I. by M.I. in response to simonedi's comment.

    It just said a 2nd Lt. was shot by a member of an attached unit during relieve, nothing more. So i guess he was killed, not just wounded, or shot at. Cannot get to the page anymore, it is already out of my "recent" history. But it was in 6 Divisision: 2 Battalion Leinster Regiment in march 1915.

    Posted

  • M.I. by M.I. in response to simonedi's comment.

    Forgot i tagged it already. Here is the link: http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/subjects/AWD0000ere

    Posted

  • Knotty by Knotty

    Is there any way additional tags could be added for the various methods of movement of supplies, and what the supplies were eg rations, troops, vehicles, horses,artillery etc, etc. working with Service Corps diaries nearly everyday has unit activity that can only be recorded as other, unless there is training going on.

    Posted

  • Poodle by Poodle

    Possibly a seperate entry?

    Posted

  • simonedi by simonedi moderator

    i think it should be, there seem to be a lot of incidents coming up

    Posted

  • Poodle by Poodle

    Pity there isn't a back button. I won't be able to go back and put in the friendly fire incident I read about.

    Posted

  • sgfoote by sgfoote

    I keep forgetting which activities are listed under Unit Activity vs Army Life - is there a reason for the distinction. It is not very clear why, for example "Parades" are under Army Life and "Training" is under Unit Activity. For both of these you could easily argue that they should/could be in the other category.

    Posted

  • sgfoote by sgfoote

    I have come across a number of references to different types of Accommodation - it would make sense if you could add in a word or two (or select from a drop-down) what type of accommodation they were in. For example one diary I have just tagged said that they were in Bivouacs for a week.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator

    Hi,

    I am collecting requests for new tags in this new, merged topic, so we can see them all in one place. We'll be updating you as we work through all of them

    Thank you for your suggestions so far -- please keep them coming.


    Find out more about IWM's Lives of the First World War

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator

    We are gathering all suggestions for types in this post, which we will edit and update as we come across more. There is no way we can add all the many suggestions we've received, but we'll consider every one and we'll l;et you know what to use instead. Thanks!

    Here are all the types and field changes that we have come across so far. If you have others, please reply to this post on this board. Many thanks.

    UNIT ACTIVITY:

    • Commenced Operations (for units that don't fight eg Latrine Unit)
    • Friendly fire
    • artillery activity (by both sides)
    • supporting artillery (other uniit) -- RESPONSE: No need to tag this as it will be in the other unit's diary.
    • preparations for attack
    • various methods of movement of supplies, and what the supplies were eg rations, troops, vehicles, horses,artillery etc, etc. (working with Service Corps diaries nearly everyday has unit activity that can only be recorded as other, unless there is training going on.)
    • Can there be a tag for work that is to do with road making, track laying, etc
    • sinking wells for water supply, or fitting out bunks for billeting or building shelters. I'm not sure what I tag these under, 'other' doesn't seem to cover it.
    • resupply activities
    • construction (building Nissen huts, constructing bridges, building tracks for tanks etc.)
    • for horses- number injured; illnesses eg mange; number put down and sold to butchery
    • Alos a job title- 'horsekeeper'- or have I missed these in the selections available?
    • 'cleaning' up camp etc
    • 'working'
    • patrol
    • 'Clearing/burying dead men and horses' Seems a recurring activity for several units
    • Working Parties
    • Units in reserve
    • Temporary transfers of personnel
    • Temporary command for officers
    • Fatigue parties
    • Mines and other explosions set off by own side
    • Damage to trenches or other fortifications
    • drafts Arriving
    • Support
    • Troops rather bored
    • attachment and detachment
    • under fire" be expanded so that for example "being shelled by your own guns" isn't categorised along with "being sniped by the enemy"
    • Occupying Positions
    • deserters
    • Resupplying'
    • 'Engineering Work'

    TIME>new field

    • morning, afternoon, evening and night

    ARMY LIFE:

    • Drill: REPSONSE please use training.

    PERSON> (NEW FIELD)

    • distinguish between British and German and possibly French and Indian troops in casualty lists from Field Ambulances?

    PERSON> Reason

    • 'Gassed' or 'wounded (gassed)
    • CO
    • Mention is made of staff illneses- again can tehre some freetext used to record these? Thank you
    • of a heart attack shortly after the war began, but there's no 'Casualties: Other' or 'Non-Combat Casualties'
    • Demob
    • Mentioned
    • Deserter

    WEATHER> (change field)

    • lots of days are described as both "fine" and "cold". This means two tags at the moment. Maybe the weather could be more of a checkbox selection so multiple elements can be picked out

    LOCATION

    • Reference is also made to field hospitals which are number- how can they be recorded as places?
    • Mark a location as a route or road.

    CASUALTIES

    • Example of text is "150 OR killed, wounded or missing". This clearly can't be categorized. Maybe we can have an additional combined category of "KWM"
    • To be able to choose a type-in box in casualties, often a numerical description is missing in the diary and only 'casualties were slight' is given

    NEW TAG: ENEMY ACTIVITY

    • Enemy Activity to get it's own breakdown box, e.g. Retreating Advancing Shelling with high explosive shelling with shrapnel

    OTHER UNIT

    • SUPPORT
    • RESERVE.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to sgfoote's comment.

    Good point. Am merging this with the new types topic for now to make sure it is considered.

    http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Thanks,


    Find out more about IWM's Lives of the First World War

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to Poodle's comment.

    I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered.

    http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Thanks,


    Find out more about IWM's Lives of the First World War

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to Knotty's comment.

    I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered.

    http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Thanks,


    Find out more about IWM's Lives of the First World War

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to johnohowson's comment.

    I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered.

    http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Thanks,


    Find out more about IWM's Lives of the First World War

    Posted

  • misty4630 by misty4630

    We need a tag for construction. I've come across several - building Nissen huts, constructing bridges, building tracks for tanks etc. I've had to put Other for all of them.

    Posted

  • wlcounsil by wlcounsil

    person: action. I see a lot of temporary assignments for officers being listed within a unit, and I see a lot of officers coming to visit/inspect hospital units and some coming to get training. All this is going under "other" now. "Inspection" "training" possible additions?

    rank: other. Possible to offer a blank to type it in? Ditto "other" under weather, unit activity, etc.

    I know you're trying to get a broad view, name references, place names. But Just 20 characters note would be informative to researchers, depending on how our work gets indexed and used and searched through.. Example: I had an officer have a nervous breakdown, and while I listed it as "sick," it's awfully interesting to know the nature of that. (typhoid, scarlet fever, trench fever. nephritis were other notes I could have made, either under casualty/sick ) If there's ever boolean searching for these specific diseases, some researcher surely would appreciate the ease of finding references to them.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to nickb55's comment.

    Finally, we get back to you!

    Time: We could probably improve this, I agree. In the meantime, please use 12.am for midnight and 12pm for midday. Much disagreement on this topic, bu we are going with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12-hour_clock. Of course your work around works fine too.

    We can tell by the position on the page what time and event is nearest to.

    Activities and weather: added to the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered.

    http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to Phil Evans's comment.

    Yes, pls see my note above. Thanks!

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to khearn's comment.

    We could be clearer on this point. There is no need t o add it as it will appear in the diary of the artillery unit. No need to worry if anyone has added these incorrectly though. Thanks.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to nickb55's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Posted

  • olems by olems moderator

    Would perhaps be nice with some sort of "organizational changes" tag. At least the artillery unit I'm tagging gets detached and attached alot to other units, groups and subgroups, or the command they're taking orders from changes, and it's all carefully recorded in the diary.

    "Person" could use a reason: In Command, for the same reason as above.

    A few more selection choices under Other Unit would be good, since there is often mention of what other units are doing,even if they're not directly connected to the diary's unit.

    Equipment destruction/damage/failure is often recorded, as is various items regarding communication lines (running telephone lines or sending out signalling parties). Stuff the engineer in me don't like to just skip over 😉

    Please also make a more of the existing tags available across the various page types.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to khearn's comment.

    Thanks!

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to pawcards's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging all this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to john(txic)'s comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to khearn's comment.

    p.s. 'OTHER' is fine for now. We can revisit others, if we find we really need to. Thanks.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to CoachRob22's comment.

    I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0

    Thanks

    Posted

  • sgfoote by sgfoote

    How about a "windy" category for weather?

    Posted

  • sgfoote by sgfoote

    I came across a report of a Gas Attack, and could not find any suitable way of tagging this - could you add/suggest something?

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to alison.aitken's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details in my post on page 3 or 4.


    Find out more about IWM's Lives of the First World War

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to danberto's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details in my long post on page 3 or 4 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to charcinders's comment.

    4 days ago -- you were amongst the first users!

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to pmj's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to catswhiskerscats's comment.

    Will have to take this one up with the historians!

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to Will F's comment.

    Interesting. This project is mainly interested in what British units reported they were doing at the time. However, I have added it to the list of suggeted tag type changes -- for a response from our history team.

    I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to sji2006's comment.

    Please enter these as locations. I have added you suggestions to the long list of suggested categories.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to richardlight's comment.

    Good question. Other is sufficient for now. Have added Commanding Officer to suggested categories list, so I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to glindsay's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully by our historians. All new category suggestions will be responded at: http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, are in my long post on page 4 or 5 above. Thanks again!

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to Swanage Belle's comment.

    Apologies for slow response. Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 4 or 5 above.

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator in response to Andys320's comment.

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 5 of 6 in this thread (above.)

    Posted

  • lukesmith by lukesmith moderator

    Thank you. I am merging this with the ‘new types’ topic for now to make sure it is considered fully. All new category suggestions will be responsed to here. http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000008/discussions/DWD00001b0
    Full details, including your suggestions that I just added, in my long post on page 5 or 6 above.

    Posted

  • itsmestephanie by itsmestephanie in response to lukesmith's comment.

    I think you're doing a really good job, first to have put this out, then to spend SO much time going through all the posts & responding to this tremendous reaction you received, and you have still more work ahead of you implementing & organising the changes & suggestions. Good job.

    More thoughts:

    Casualties: In RE diaries, have a lot of entries "taken to hospital" and "discharged from hospital". No indication of whether sickness or wounded; and have been entering "discharged from hospital" as negative casualties....

    Weather: In RE diaries, they pay a lot of attention to "wet" and "dry". "Wet" could be rain/storm or dull/drizzle, "dry" could be dull/drizzle or sunny/warm.... support the idea of multiple choice tick-boxes, would make sense to somehow incorporate "wet" and "dry"... in addition to the current categories even if there might be overlap. I'm thinking we should be able to mark exactly what we read, and the 'categorisation' would be done at data analysis stage.

    Unit activity
    If they're in the trenches, I put "in the line" without distinction whether they're in the front, support or reserve trench. Is there any interest in making a distinction?

    Enemy activity:
    Often talk about planes... (not always enemy planes, but often) - perhaps there's interest in noting those.

    Finally it would be good if you organised your discussion boards so that your big important messages (like that on page 6) are more visible!!!

    Posted

  • nickb55 by nickb55 in response to itsmestephanie's comment.

    I wholeheartedly agree with itsmestephanie that the discussion board could be better organised! I'm taking a look after a few days' absence and it's a bit of a nightmare to find your way around - no wonder people are posting the same comments time and time again, even though many of these have been responded to or explained more than once (eg difficulties moving the diary page around without dropping unwanted tags).

    Posted

  • RobinLucas by RobinLucas

    I see many entries mentioning a name "admitted to hospital". The only option in the list is "Departed sick" which doesn't quite match.

    Posted

  • Tangledown by Tangledown

    Tagging 'in reserve' would be good

    Posted

  • bobg51 by bobg51

    Can we have 'Assumed Command' in the persons tag as many officer mentions are about this and 'Other' is having to be used too often. alternatively widen promotion and use it to cover role /command /promotion

    Posted

  • Poodle by Poodle

    What about a tag for aerial or aeroplane activity? Also when officers and NCOs take over a company etc., when someone goes off sick or on leave. It's not exactly a promotion when they're only acting for a few days or weeks, but it helps build a picture of their war career. Certainly agree about gas warnings too. There will be so many things marked as "other", will they be of much use?

    Posted

  • angiehart by angiehart

    I've had some pages where someone came and took over command when the original commander was injured or in hospital, so this is not really a promotion and I've been marking it as 'other'. An 'assumed command' or something similar would be good. I've also had some where a person was just visiting and putting this as 'other' too.

    I've also been tagging a lot of letters, but as these are not diary pages, orders, signals or reports, I've been tagging them as 'other' type, perhaps a separate category of 'Letters' would be good. There is often lots of info in the letters and I don't know whether this needs to be tagged or not.

    Posted

  • thelazza by thelazza

    Hi - would it be possible for an entry in either Army Life and or Unit to have an entry we can use for stores. The reason being that I am looking at an Ammunition Column diary, and the actual amount of Ordnance being issued is well worth documenting. Thanks

    Posted

  • GunnerHarris by GunnerHarris

    Suggest 'FIRING'is added as a tag for unit activity. Artillery units are frequntly in action firing, but the nature of their job is supporting fire, whether this is of an attack or defence. The nearest tag I have found and used is 'ATTACKING' - but this really isn't right and I suspect other taggers may use other tags, generating inconsistency

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    If you read the Field Guide for the "attacking" tag (quoted below) you will see you are correct to use it. We can't have tags for everything.

    "Headquarters allocated infantry units objectives such as a village or trench line as the focus for their part in an attack. Artillery units supported attacks by laying down a barrage or wall of shells, all in a pre-planned and carefully timed pattern. Other units assisted by bringing up ammunition and other supplies or removing casualties. Tag any mention of the unit participating in or supporting an attack."

    I take your point that fire can be defensive but for now all you can do is use the "attacking" tag

    Posted

  • GunnerHarris by GunnerHarris in response to HeatherC's comment.

    Will do for now - I've also thought of another.

    There are three basic combat postures - attacking - defending/holding and withdrawing. I'd then add 'firing in support' for static supporting units like artillery. The first and last combat postures are clearly covered, but the middle one has no clear action associated - i.e. a successful defence.

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    You're right of course and lots of alternative tags for non-infantry Units have been suggested as you can see by looking back at this thread (which I merged yours into). If you think the current tags aren't appropriate for an RA Unit you should try doing an RE one or an ASC one or a Medical Unit... I think the idea was to avoid having too many tags that were "Unit-specific" and in consequence there are a lot of tags that can only be described as "other". I'm not sure if any of the additional tag suggestions are being taken up. Hopefully someone from IWM will let us know!

    Posted

  • Maj971 by Maj971

    Re-posted from, originally, wrong thread ! Sri !!
    I'm a little frustrated that I am not able to Tag a unit when it is e.g. 'In Reserve' prior to an attack; or the Disposition of Bn Coy's prior to an attack, as well as the Coy Commanders and those officers e.g. i/c of 'bombers' or 'transport' etc. Also, the inclusion of an Other Unit tag for 'To Front' or 'To Rear' would be useful, as would 'Defensive Position' for the primary Unit.

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    There is still no way to tag someone who died of disease. Tagging a soldier who died during the winter of 1917 of pneumonia with "other" doesn't really seem right!

    On the same subject we still have no way to tag those injured or killed from non-combat causes.

    Posted

  • Beximus by Beximus

    Wouls definitely like a Departed to Hospital option under the person tag. It happens often and never seems to mention whether it's because they were wounded or sick, which I guess would be an important distinction.

    Posted

  • charcinders by charcinders

    Sorry if this has been raised before (didn't show up in search): I think in the Reason tag in the signals pad page there should be an option for something like "Unit movement".

    I just tagged a lot of signals pads and at least half were instructions from HQ detailing where various companies should move to. Had to tag them all as "Other".

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    I reaslie this thread seems to have died but as I know that many of the suggestions here got taken up when the tags were altered it seems like the right place to post suggestions for new tags. Currently users have made two suggestions that I am aware of (please add more!)

    Firstly Jan Greenslade suggested here http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000009/discussions/DWD0000bgb that we might have a tag for aeroplane activity.

    Secondly cotula would like tags for various aspects of the use of horses http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD000000a/discussions/DWD0000bhc

    Heather

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Hi Heather. There's a project meeting tomorrow. I'll make sure to raise the suggestions for plane and horses tags.

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    Hi Rob

    If you mean the one in Oxford then I'll see you there...

    Heather

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    So the questions about horses and aeroplanes were asked at the Project meeting yesterday and for now neither will be implemented. I already explained about the aeroplanes here http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD0000009/discussions/DWD0000bgb?page=1&comment_id=53805370241fe15cf1000f86

    The answer for the horses really is that we need to remember what the remit of the Project is. The three main aims are listed here http://www.operationwardiary.org/#/about under "Project Outcomes". Right now, no-one on the Academic team is convinced of the need to include detailed information about horses.

    What I would suggest:

    Continue to hashtag horses if you wish, although to be honest the word is so common in the diaries that I'm not sure it's useful to do this on its own any longer.

    If you have some information on horses that you feel is interesting, worth preserving and/or makes the argument for having tags for horses then tell us about it and link to the page it is on. Add any such details to this thread http://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/boards/BWD000000a/discussions/DWD0000bhc and see if YOU can convince the research team!

    Heather

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    It's also worth noting that the project's research team have their particular areas of expertise and interest, but that doesn't preclude any of our Citizen Historians carrying out their own research. We're working on ways to make the data generated by your tagging activities available to you, so if you think you might want to delve deeper into the use of horses during the First World War it would be well worth following Heather's suggestion and making your interests known on the linked thread. Volunteers on other Zooniverse projects have enjoyed great success by pursuing mutual interests often quite different to those of the academic research teams.

    Posted