Jump to content

Talk:Thomas White (Australian politician)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 21:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


Looks pretty good

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
    C. No original research:
    D. No copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


Just a few queries, nothing much:

  • To my mind, he served with the Australian Army from 1911 to 1940, and with the RAAF from 1940 to 1944
  • Yes, fair enough, perhaps for brevity we could represent in the infobox as:
Service/branch....Australian Flying Corps (1914–20); Royal Australian Air Force (1940–44)
Years of service..1911–44
  • While we're in the infobox, do you think I should add the 6th Battalion under Commands held?
  • What's with the "(Sir)"s?
    • Shorthand for "(later Sir)", e.g. as in the ADB entry's "(Sir) Robert Menzies" -- though admittedly I didn't use it for him as he's likely to be much better known to the reader than Dicky Williams, George Jones, etc. I don't mind leaving it out for Jones and/or modifying for Williams if you think it's distracting.
  • And the ellipses before footnote 23?
    • Didn't add that snippet myself but was happy to leave it in -- I agree the ellipses aren't really necessary and will remove.
  • You don't mention his work as an occasional anonymous correspondent for the London Morning Post (Daily Telegraph and Morning Post)
    • I guess I didn't want to look like I was just paraphrasing the ADB entry (which was about the only source when I started work on the article) and it didn't strike me as particularly significant, but perhaps I have a blind spot...
  • Should we mention the names of his daughters? (Lilian, Patricia, Shirley and Judith)
    • I tend not to mention children's names if they're not (wiki)notable or unless they did something that's worth mentioning in the article.
  • Or that his papers are in the National Library?
    • Good point, will add.

Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tks for reviewing! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:38, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Passing now. Note that although the article is disambiguated with "(Australian politician)", I am placing it in the military section, as that's where you nominated it for review. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tks Hawkeye -- while he may indeed be more notable as a politician than a military man, I think that having been an escapee and written a book about his experiences he might well have earned a place in the ADB even without his parliamentary career, and certainly the military occupies a fair bit of space in the article and sources, especially given his last ministry put him in political charge of the RAAF. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]