A fact from Chester War Memorial appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 January 2014 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Cheshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
I have retrieved the description of the saints from a footnote to the text. The identity of the saints is important in understanding the meaning of the monument.
Since WWI, Michael, previously simply seen as a warrior saint, has been increasingly used to represent the Air Force.
Question: do Roberts and Morris give a description of the style of the monument, or merely its form? I have added the words "in the Gothic style" in relation to the niches. However, it would also be good to mention that the plinth is battlemented, in keeping with the cathedral.
Thanks for your comments, and particularly for the considerable improvements you have made. R&M make no mention of the style of the memorial, nor do they say that the plinth is battlemented; in fact their description is rather brief, most of the text being about the history of the planning and building. I have been reluctant to add what can obviously be seen, but not mentioned in the text, I guess because it may be construed to be OR - or maybe it isn't. --
Peter I. Vardy (
talk) 10:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)reply