Talk:Arthur Umbers/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk · contribs) 17:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will review shortly. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prelim

V-1 flying bomb is a dup link in the lede

Fixed. Zawed (talk) 09:57, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No edit wars
Earwig reports no copyvio. Only hits are the award citations.
Images look correctly licensed, but could you highlight where the Air Force Museum of New Zealand discusses CC0 1.0?

Clicking on the rights tab here and here shows the copyright status that the museum has applied to the respective images. Zawed (talk) 10:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lede and infobox

I'm not sure if this is something I've mentioned in previous reviews, but it would be useful to note in the main text as well as the lede, when exactly he becomes a flying ace

My preference would be to not do this in general unless it is specifically identified in a source, i.e. a source explicitly said that the aircraft shot down on X date was the victor's fifth aerial victory (I don't have any such source for Umbers). This is due to a degree of uncertainty around evaluation of aerial victories. For many pilots, postwar work by researchers (such as Shores and Williams) who had access to both RAF and Luftwaffe records has seen their aerial victory counts revised. There are a number of cases in which a pilot's aerial victory count was reduced from what was generally believed at the time; Alan Deere is one example that I am aware of, having worked on his article. Although I would think it would be uncommon, there are also likely to be a few cases where the scenario is reversed; the pilot didn't become an ace until after the war! Zawed (talk) 06:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"flew extensively" perhaps fought extensively to avoid it sounding more like a social club

I'm not crazy on "fought"; for some reason I see that more of a land war thing. I have revised this section to refer to night fighting and offensive sorties which I think goes towards remedying your concern on this point. Zawed (talk) 06:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers: You use both "fifteen" and "18" in the lede

I think this is OK, because the word is in relation to a quantity whereas the number is relation to time. Zawed (talk) 10:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't think about failing an article for something about numbers, but you don't spell out the numbers for the V-1 tallies in the main text
Written out all aerial victory numbers now. Zawed (talk) 06:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misplaced or out of place † symbol next to date of death

I have occasionally used that symbol in other articles, but can delete it here if it is going to cause a problem. Zawed (talk) 10:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, it kind of makes sense being there, but in my (admittedly not huge) experience, if someone is killed in action then the symbol is more appropriate next to the battle in which they were killed, e.g. Western Allied invasion of Germany

Actually, your approach also makes sense. I'm not fussed either way though so will leave it out. Zawed (talk) 06:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

Otago Daily Times source seems to suggest that only the latter Dunedin post was with the Tourism Bureau/Department, with Wellington just a "Government position"?

I have revised this to better match the source. Zawed (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second World War

An explanation of what an "airman pilot" is would be useful to distinguish it from other pilots

effectively it is a trainee pilot, I've added a link. Zawed (talk) 05:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link Supermarine Spitfire

Done. Zawed (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"convoy patrols" protecting or attacking?

Defensive/protective, have added. Zawed (talk) 05:59, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"after a number of weeks it switched..." is this before or after Umbers joins the squadron? If the former make it more obvious that it was him operating Hurricanes rather than just the squadron

Have added more detail on this time period, and this makes it clear that the conversion to Typhoons happens well after he joined the squadron. Zawed (talk) 05:59, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Both he and his wingman..." this reads like the Dornier Do 17 was patrolling with another pilot and then set its engines on fire!

Yeah, I can see that. Rephrased. Zawed (talk) 10:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"in April 1942" do you mean 1943?

Yeah, that is a typo. Fixed. Zawed (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The only reference to his promotion to flight lieutenant is in the two citations, and you skip flying officer entirely. Can you add any dates for promotions, or at least say that they occurred?

I have found a mention of him as a flying officer, so have added. I think that Sortehaug should mention when he was promoted to flight lieutenant but I don't have a personal copy of that book. I will head into my library which has a copy and check, this will most likely be on Tuesday. Zawed (talk) 05:59, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have found mention of his promotion to flight lieutenant, have added along with a few other details here and there. Zawed (talk) 09:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link sortie

Done. Zawed (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"He ended up crashing behind Allied lines and having" > "He crashed behind Allied lines and had..."

Rephrased as suggested. Zawed (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"shot down five German aircraft" I count only 4 1/2 recorded in the text?

I entirely missed one! Have added the necessary detail now. Zawed (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

Ref #11 is very chunky, suggest splitting out to make it easier to see what page different bits of info come from

Done. Zawed (talk) 05:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The CWGC page provides his service number which could be added to the infobox

Have added this to infobox and body of text, one of the existing sources identifies the service number. Zawed (talk) 06:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks look good. AGF with print sources.

@Zawed: That's my first run-through complete. Will await your replies. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: thank you for the thorough review. I have responded above and with a number of edits to the article. There is one thing I still need to do, which is see if I can get a confirmation of when the promotion to flight lieutenant happened. There is a book in my local library that I want to check on this point, once I have done this (probably this coming Tuesday), I will ping you. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 06:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Having found the extra information you were requesting (along with a few extra details), I have finished this off now. It is ready for you to take another look. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second look

A couple of points remain:

Wingman is now a dup link

fixed. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Sortehaug ref is dated 1998 in the ref list but 1997 in main text

Arg, that is just sloppy on my part. Have fixed all 1997 instances, it should be 1998. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link No. 80 Squadron in the image caption

Done. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link service number

Done. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Word repetition in sentence beginning "Umbers was promoted to flight lieutenant..."

Fixed. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move flight commander link to first instance

Done. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link BBC - is this a specific radio program?

Done but to BBC Home Service - there doesn't appear to a link to the specific program operated by that BBC channel. The Wikipedia link is to a different version of the 9 O'Clock news. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Rheine airfield" where?

Have added a link. Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Zawed: That's all I've got! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:52, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: I have gone through and remedied the various issues. Thanks again for the review! Zawed (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to pass this article as satisfying the GA criteria. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:23, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]