Soldiers of the Great War, 1920: New Mexico

William S. Norman

Private William S. Norman of Mcintosh, New Mexico is listed in Soldiers of the Great War, 1920: New Mexico (1920) as soldier, world war i (wounded in action). The page shows the portrait and details printed in that source.

Soldier, World War I (wounded in action), 1920

70 people in Soldiers of the Great War, 1920: New Mexico · 17 more named Norman

Full name: William S. Norman
Source: Soldiers of the Great War, 1920: New Mexico
Listed as: Soldier, World War I (wounded in action), 1920

Spot a mistake? Wrong name Wrong photo Something else

Is William part of your family? Tell us — we will send you the full-resolution scan.

Also in this book 69

In context

William S. Norman is number 49 of 70 in the alphabetical list of the New Mexico roll in Soldiers of the Great War (1920) on this site. Of 68 ranks printed in this list, 62 (91%) are Private, William's among them. In this list 44% of recorded outcomes (31 of 70) read wounded in action, the same as William's.

Same rank	Private: 62 of 68 with a printed rank (91%)
Recorded outcome	wounded in action: 31 of 70 with an outcome (44%)

Also in Soldiers of the Great War, 1920: New Mexico

All 70 in this list →

Look for William S. Norman in other records

FamilySearch census, birth, marriage and death records (free account)
Internet Archive other yearbooks, city directories and town reports that mention the name
Chronicling America digitized newspapers at the Library of Congress

Do you know William?

If William is part of your family we would like to hear from you, and we will gladly send the full-resolution scan of this page.

Get in touch

Source

Soldiers of the Great War, 1920: New Mexico, page 271. View the original at the Internet Archive (item SoldiersOfTheGreatWarV2).

Published 1920, and therefore in the public domain in the United States. Scan courtesy of Internet Archive via the Internet Archive.

How this page was made: the name, portrait and printed details were read from the scan by software and checked against the page; a few in every hundred details are still wrong. How it works · Report an error · Standards