WW2Talk Has Absolutely No Connection To 'Forces War Records'.

Discussion in 'Network Information, Suggestions and Feedback' started by von Poop, Nov 22, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. timbo58

    timbo58 Discharged

    I would tend to agree, however every site has snippets which can lead searchers beyond brick walls.

    The issue is with sites such as FWR and FMP, GR , and Ancestry is that they all have differing sources which may or may not be of use as it's not possible for the sites to know what level of knowledge and specific needs are required by each searcher initially.

    i.e. how much does a site give away for free before they start to need a fee to be paid?
    Someone who's done little or no research wouldn't need much at all, neither would someone only doing very general searching, however the sort of chaps on here (not 'bigging anyone up' mind- just pointing out the obvious) are not likely to be satisfied with basic stuff even if that is then cross matched from multiple sources.

    Some sites have an inbuilt advantage as their scope is much more widely focused -it allows them to generously offer all WWI records as a hook for registrations (and payments if the renewal is not switched off in 'X' days) as the 6 million records they offer are only 10% of what they have and are a niche within a niche on a broad spectrum site -this is entirely why I am really keen for FWR to have more free datasets like the Jap pows/medieval stuff at present.

    FWR is Military only and British/Commonwealth only so although it's far more focused it can only give x amount of data before it has to charge.

    Obviously as it gets more & more data included that can change.

    My biggest input into the FWR site in particular was to get the library launched and I have personally sourced a lot of the material in there, I'd welcome some feedback on that in particular as I am constantly trying to see 'gaps' -I have concentrated on Boer/WWI and WWII and think there's a pretty good spread across all 3 services, with some stuff that's dead easy to get (like the periodical magazines) and some a bit harder (like IWGC/CWGC lists, HG manuals etc) and some rocking horse poo (POW magazines etc).

    Currently we have some WWI naval stuff going in, and I am having the DAK (Afrika Korps) book translated from the Italian text which is very interesting as it clearly shows a lack of respect the 8th Army had to re-educate them with a little while after the book -no wonder the 2nd planned edition wasn't written!

    Hopefully the sources page will be launched very soon and I know we'd like to hear some feedback then too.

    Of course as I said earlier some of the original sources are going to be wooly due to the original suppliers not giving us this exact detail, so it'd be good if we together can pinpoint some of this.
  2. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    There's a 'Timbo58' who seems to have a real interest in scooters if multiple Websites are anything to go by.

    Chap on the Youtube comments for that FWR video slagging off Ancestry as 'crappy' and leaving rave reviews seems to like his scooters too, when you look at his rather sparse Youtube history.

    • Billy Thomas 3 days ago
      Just taken a look in their Library too: someone has clearly spent a great deal of time & money gathering these fantastic books & magazines -what a great resource!

      · ·

    • Billy Thomas 1 month ago
      I've had a look on the site and it seems pretty clear: yes, I agree it could be seen as a little frustrating if you want to look in the records but after all it's clearly a commercial site and how else would they exist?
      There's quite a bit in there for free after all, I'm a member on Ancestry and yes, they have free trials occasionally but they are worse as most of the military stuff is always hidden even when you think you're on a free trial it's for crappy records easily found at the library!

    Lordy, what a coincidence.

    Wonder why I can't believe you when you say here:
    Drew5233 likes this.
  3. Tullybrone

    Tullybrone Senior Member

    Similar discussion ongoing on The Great War Forum

    Steve Y
  4. ritsonvaljos

    ritsonvaljos Senior Member

    Depending on what someone is looking for 'WW2 Talk' seems to be a good resource about the Second World War. For example, there are regular genuine requests about 'help with Granddad's wartime service' (or similar) most of which seem to get answered by 'WW2 Talk' site members (for free!).
  5. GPRegt

    GPRegt Senior Member

    And I can be contacted through the GPR Assn website/ FB page (see below) for FREE help with questions/queries about Regimental members/history etc.

    Steve W.
    CL1 and ritsonvaljos like this.
  6. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    Just bumping this thread again so the message gets out there in internet land.
  7. ritsonvaljos

    ritsonvaljos Senior Member

    Another bump to make sure it is seen by the 'unwary'.

    The misunderstanding about a possible link to FWR could be due to the adverts that often appear at the top of the web page. Hopefully anyone who sees these adverts will appreciate the difference.

    I noticed a couple of 'WW2 Talk' forum members who have posted to this thread are described as 'Discharged'. Presumably this means they are now former members of 'WW2 Talk' ?
  8. Ron Goldstein

    Ron Goldstein WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran Patron


    Discharged = Persona non grata = no longer welcome

  9. ritsonvaljos

    ritsonvaljos Senior Member

    Thanks Ron.

    I must have been on leave when the "drumming out" ceremony took place!
  10. Phaethon

    Phaethon Historian

    I am a little uncertain about the mechanics of this, but is it not the case that this site has put ww2talk as a keyword in various search engines. On my smartphone, when I type ww2talk- it is the first site that comes up with ww2talk second.
  11. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    WW2Talk continues to have no connection to that website.

    We're also now choosing to ban all discussion of them here, as the Owner's response to questions posted on a now-removed thread on which they invited queries, was eventually an accusation of libel.

    Sorry chaps, not our usual friendly style, but any further references to them will be deleted.
    Owen and dbf like this.
  12. dbf

    dbf Moderatrix MOD

    It's been a while since this thread was last updated so here's a gentle reminder to folks who've forgotten and a heads-up for those who've recently joined up and may not have been aware...

    Last edited: Aug 28, 2020
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page