Talk:This was their finest hour

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 18, 2019.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: British / European / World War II Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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 met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

Untitled

This article is a shameless rip-off of Blood, toil, tears, and sweat speech, suitably modified for this speech. Noel (talk) 04:13, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

- that's not really important; it's quite reasonable to reuse material here. This is after all a community project, so the essential premise of plagiarism doesn't apply. jamesgibbon 15:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about it, but according to the dates that appear in the article this was the _first_ of the three speeches, wasn't it?

213.8.71.170 16:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't normally do this, but I see no one took notice of my above comment, and so I'm taking the liberty to change the page myself.

213.8.71.170 16:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Wikisource?

I am listening to this speech as I write this, and I happen to notice that in the recording Churchill says "What General Weygand has called the Battle of France is over. The Battle of Britain is about to begin." Yet in both this article and on Wikisource it says "...is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin." Comments? --Pelle-Gnillot (talk) 22:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The recording is not of the original speech. Hansard has I expect that and Hansard is the official record. (Strictly speaking, Hansard isn't a reliable record of what was actually said, since MPs are allowed to retrospectively edit the speeches so they make sense on the printed page)Rjccumbria (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

as with the other articles on the Churchill speeches of 1940, the facts being addressed by the speech don't seem to be fully grasped. Churchill says the Battle of France is over, because it was : the French had sued for peace on the evening of 16th June, and had ceased fire as of 1240 hours June 17; what happened on June 22 was the ceremony in the railway carriage in the Forest of CompiegneRjccumbria (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Wikisource ?(2)

The version of the speech in wikisource differs considerably at some points from the version in the online Hansard, most noticeably in the treatment given to the support of the Dominions .

on-line Hansard	wikisource
I have thought it right upon this occasion to give the House and the country some indication of the solid, practical grounds upon which we base our inflexible resolve to continue the war	I have thought it right upon this occasion to give the House and the country some indication of the solid, practical grounds upon which we base our inflexible resolve to continue the war
and	There are a good many people who say, 'Never mind. Win or lose, sink or swim, better die than submit to tyranny--and such a tyranny.' And I do not dissociate myself from them. But
I can assure them that our professional advisers of the three Services unitedly advise that we should do so, and that there are good and reasonable hopes of final victory. We have also fully informed and consulted all the self-governing Dominions,	I can assure them that our professional advisers of the three Services unitedly advise that we should carry on the war, and that there are good and reasonable hopes of final victory. We have fully informed and consulted all the self-governing Dominions,
	these great communities far beyond the oceans who have been built up on our laws and on our civilization, and who are absolutely free to choose their course, but are absolutely devoted to the ancient Motherland, and who feel themselves inspired by the same emotions which lead me to stake our all upon duty and honor. We have fully consulted them,
and I have received from their Prime Ministers, Mr. Mackenzie King, Mr. Menzies, Mr. Fraser and General Smuts,	and I have received from their Prime Ministers, Mr. Mackenzie King of Canada, Mr. Menzies of Australia, Mr. Fraser of New Zealand, and General Smuts of South Africa
	that wonderful man, with his immense profound mind, and his eye watching from a distance the whole panorama of European affairs--I have received from all these eminent men, who all have Governments behind them elected on wide franchises, who are all there because they represent the will of their people
messages couched in the most moving terms in which they endorse our decision and declare themselves ready to share our fortunes and to persevere to the end	messages couched in the most moving terms in which they endorse our decision to fight on, and declare themselves ready to share our fortunes and to persevere to the end

Clearly either the Hansard version has been edited down, or the wikisource speech has been expanded with explanatory matter for the benefit of an audience/readership less familiar with Dominion status etc than an MP of 1940 would have been. One would suspect the latter, and the spelling of honor would suggest that the wikisource speech has a provenance which at some point passes through the USA. So the underlying question is which version of the speech is the truth, which the legend , and of course which one should Wikipedia print? Rjccumbria (talk) 21:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article formerly referred to this talk page in an attempt to document the differences. This is wholly inappropriate: talk pages are not encyclopedic content, mirrors do not copy them, print versions will be incomprehensible with such references. I have removed them. If you want to document the different versions, do it in the article itself. Hairy Dude (talk) 00:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author

Did Churchill write the whole speech himself? The article implied this, but never explicitly stated it. Lavaka (talk) 16:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand it

I came to this page to learn something about this historic phrase and I got almost nothing. Why was it said? Who were "they"? Why was it their finest hour? This article should be rewritten in my opinion. --Caramella1 (talk) 09:44, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The way I understand it, "their finest hour" (should they last a thousand years) will be, or is, or was, when the British kept their honour and their proverbial stiff upper lip, and fought for a free Europe against the Nazis against all semblance of hope. "They" are mentioned in the preceding sentence: [the people of] the British Empire and its Commonwealth. And why it was said: to strengthen the British people's sense of honour, obviously. About rewriting the article: such a famous speech should IMHO not be quoted in paraphrase, or it would lose all its power. — Tonymec (talk) 17:39, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]