Contents

Talk:First Geneva Convention

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

International relations: United Nations / Law Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations. This article is supported by WikiProject International law. Military history 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 This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met Additional information: /  No existing task force includes this article in its scope; to propose a new one, please leave a message on the main project talk page. Human rights High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. British Empire This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire 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.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on August 22, 2004, August 22, 2005, August 22, 2006, August 22, 2011, August 22, 2014, August 22, 2016, August 22, 2018, August 22, 2020, and August 22, 2022.

Is it me or does this article completely not say what this convention actually does. It describes the history and what it pertains to but not what the convention actually is, what protections it affords. 129.42.208.182 20:38, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have 196 countries signed the First Convention or the Fourth? Why would countries still be signing the First Convention when there was an updated version available? If Japan & Russia did not sign the Second Convention, did they sign the First before WWII? JMcC 18:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The text here says 16 states came together to sign the geneva convention. I make it 12. here's my source. http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebSign?ReadForm&id=120&ps=P Can't get much more authoritative than the ICRC itself when it comes to Geneva conventions. I would do it myself, but i'm sure someone would get shitty at me for not referncing it (as i don't know how). So i'm giving you the reference and you can do it yourself.130.195.86.40 05:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please explain why the convention has red ink blotches? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.187.250.187 (talk) 00:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC) In those days, when you signed a document, you also applied your seal in a wax impression on the page. If you examine an enlarged image you can see the seal shapes in the wax. There is also marks on the facing page and you can see further wax marks on the next page showing through the signatures there.Bigbuzzboy (talk) 04:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember a European reaction to Andersonville was a factor, however the timing is wrong. Clara Barton & Dorence Atwater are dated to 1865. An interesting but unverified URL is http://gothagepress.com/Geneva%20Convention%20History.htm 86.135.122.193 (talk) 05:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone find a place close to that nice map to put an explanation of the meaning of 'P' mentioned in that legend, as in "P I and III", etc. There is no mention at all in the article of what is being referred to. After wandering around a bit I finally figured out these must refer to the amendment protocols Protocol I, Protocol II, and Protocol III. They were mentioned by full name in the template, but have a care for the non-expert in Geneva Conventions, hey? Shenme (talk) 02:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]