Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tom Eastick

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Gog the Mild (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 22:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Tom Eastick

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

Featured article candidates/Tom Eastick/archive1

Another prominent South Australian soldier. Tom Eastick was a part-time Militia officer in the interwar period who commanded an Australian artillery regiment at the Battles of El Alamein in 1942 then commanded the artillery of Australian divisions in New Guinea and then Borneo in 1943–1945. He took the Japanese surrender in Sarawak, and was military governor there after the war ended. He was prominent in ex-service organisations in South Australia, and was knighted in 1970 for his volunteer work. This one has been recently expanded and went through GAN earlier this month. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:25, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass (t · c) buidhe 07:32, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Buidhe! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Buidhe, I've added a couple of new images, could you check them please? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looks fine. (t · c) buidhe 01:19, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Nick-D

This article is in good shape, but I have a few perhaps nit-picking comments:

"Tom was promoted to captain " - I think we usually stick to last names?

Thanks, a leftover from a para split where the last names mentioned were those of his sons. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"and the following year a Royal Australian Air Force pilot adjusted the fire of Eastick's battery during field firing." - can you be clearer on how this was an innovation? Didn't the AFC spot artillery fire in World War I? (presumably this was the first time it had been done in Australia or similar?)

This is not spotting, but call of fire adjustment directly by the pilot acting as an observer. Presumably with radio direct to the battery. Not sure that was even possible in WWI when truly mobile two-way radio wasn't developed until 1923 (in Victoria by a cop, and that was in a car and took up the entire back seat). I note that an Austro-Hungarian pilot apparently controlled artillery fire in the 1915 Battle of Gorlice via morse code. Not sure how to clarify this, the ADB entry says "A second innovation with which he was associated was the control of artillery fire from aircraft: in 1927 a Royal Australian Air Force pilot adjusted the fire of Eastick’s battery during field firing." Thoughts? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno to be honest! A bunch of sources say that the AFC spotted artillery fire in France (e.g. [1]), but I'm afraid that I don't know how this was done. Chris Coulthard-Clark's book on the early years of the RAAF The Third Brother notes that the RAAF spotted artillery for Army for the first time in 1922, and this continued infrequently during the 1920s (pp. 210-211). He notes on page 211 that an artillery spotting exercise took place in Adelaide during 1926. Nick-D (talk) 09:37, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have to assume that the ADB author, David Brook, a historian of guns in SA, has it right, and use his wording. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough ;) Nick-D (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"its original members were mainly Militia artillerymen" - presumably they'd all volunteered for the AIF?

Yes, it was an AIF unit from the beginning - clarified. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

" the 9th Division, including the 2/7th Field Regiment, began returning to Australia to prepare for operations against the Japanese closer to home" - at the risk of nit-picking, this implies that the division moved gradually to Australia when it actually moved as a single unit (see Operation Pamphlet).

changed to "returned". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The regiment disembarked in Melbourne a week after its visit to Fremantle" - the division stopped over in Fremantle, but only the West Australian personnel disembarked, I think.

Correct, adjusted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The 9th Division was at that time reforming and training on the Atherton Tablelands in North Queensland" - I'd suggest nothing that this was after it had also served in New Guinea

Sure, added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should the 9th Division be listed as one of the units Eastick commanded in the infobox? Maybe not as it would have been being disbanded at this time.

He was commander of the divisional guns, not the division as a whole. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that "He then administered command of the 9th Division until February 1946" though? Nick-D (talk) 09:37, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see what you mean. Not sure I would include "administration of command" in the infobox though. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:09, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, unless Johnston makes some kind of note of this in his history of the division. By that time there wouldn't have been much of the division left. Nick-D (talk) 00:57, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Was he the commander of Central Command (in the lead) or its headquarters? (in the body of the article)?

Well spotted. The source says "commander, Headquarters Group, Central Command" fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"for bringing the problem to public notice" - was it a 'problem'? The source (the very left wing Tribune) says that this was a witch hunt with the premier acknowledging the men weren't doing anything against the public interest.

changed to "issue". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As a suggestion for further development, there may be material on Eastick in the volumes of the official history that cover El Alemain and the final campaigns. Long provides a bit of coverage of the post-war occupation forces, for instance (I'm very slowly working on an article on this at User:Nick-D/Drafts7 which might have some useful pointers). Steve Gower's Guns of the Regiment might also be worth checking.

I did skim the OH, but will take a closer look. Indexing isn't the best. Will also check Gower. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I emailed the AWM a few years ago to suggest that they post single PDF versions of the OH volumes now that download sizes aren't a problem, and they responded to claim that this wasn't technically feasible for them. Which is a shame as searching the PDFs often works a lot better than using the index. Nick-D (talk) 09:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it is a bit of a problem. While I've been able to add quite a bit on the pre-Alamein period from Maughan, it turns out Eastick isn't mentioned in the Alamein chapters of Vol III, or the New Guinea chapters of Vol IV other than to state in a fn that he was CRA 7th Div. I think getting into the weeds of divisional artillery support provided during the various campaigns is really out of scope for a bio though. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:14, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Being the CRA of the 7th and 9th Divisions would have been an odd job given that they fought in widely dispersed units in terrain that was difficult for artillery to operate in for most of the time. Nick-D (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a bit under-illustrated. The AWM has quite a few other photos of Eastick that could be used (for instance [2] and lots of when he led Sarawak Force. It might also be worth checking his NAA record to see if it includes mugshot photos, etc. Nick-D (talk) 10:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Without sandwiching, I reckon there is probably only space for one other image on the left. I'll take a look though. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is his pers file isn't digitised, probably due to his post-war service. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK. It is a bit random which are and aren't digitialised. Nick-D (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support My comments are now addressed, and I'm happy to support this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Pendright

Happy New Year @Peacemaker67: A few more nitpickers! Pendright (talk) 01:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Upon return from the Middle East he commanded the artillery of the 7th Division during the final stage of the Salamaua–Lae campaign and then during the Markham, Ramu and Finisterre campaigns in New Guinea between August 1943 and April 1944, and then held the same role for the 9th Division during the Borneo campaign in 1945.

Upon return from the Middle East -> this seems to fit the definition of an introductory phrase?

comma inserted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Last clause lacks a subject

split off into separate sentence, which I think fixes this problem. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eastick was military governor of the Raj of Sarawak after taking the Japanese surrender at Kuching, and was commander of the Headquarters Group of Central Command in South Australia from 1950 to 1953.

Need a "he" in the last clause

Added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was the state president of the Returned Sailors', Soldiers' and Airmen's Imperial League of Australia (the Returned & Services League from 1965) between 1950 and 1954 and again from 1961 to 1972.

Why is Airmen's singular possessdive?

It isn't. It is plural possessive. Airmen is already plural, 's makes it possessive. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was made a Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George in 1953, and knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 1970, in both cases for his volunteer work on behalf of ex-servicemen.

is 'in both cases' necessary?

Probably not. deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Earlt life:

Having served for four years in the compulsory senior cadets, in 1918, Eastick enlisted as a part-time soldier in the Australian Field Artillery of the Citizen Forces.

for could be dropped
Why the comma before 1918

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- On 31 October of the following year, Eastick married Ruby Sybil Bruce, a saleswoman and youngest daughter of Mrs A. H. Bruce, at the Baptist church at Richmond, and after a honeymoon at Port Noarlunga,[3] they lived in the northern part of Colonel Light Gardens known as Reade Park.

"at" the Baptist chruch -> "in" the Bapist chruch
Drop the comma after Noarlunga

Both done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The business venture went well until the Great Depression began around 1929, after which difficulties mounted.[1]

Should mounted have some elaboration?

There is nothing in the source to add. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following year Eastick was temporarily promoted to lieutenant colonel and appointed as the commanding officer of the 13th Field Brigade.

Could use a comma after year

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Service in the Middle East:

Eastick's regiment arrived in the Middle East in December 1940, and was garrisoned at Qastina in Palestine where it conducted training with World War I-vintage QF 18-pounder guns and QF 4.5-inch howitzers.

"World War I-vintage" -> Hyphen?

Deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In March 1941 the 9th Division was moved to Egypt, but due to lack of vehicles, the 2/7th Field Regiment did not join them until the following month.

Could drop the comma after vechicles?

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Initially deployed to a staging area at Ikingi Maryut,[1][7] in late May it moved forward into defensive positions at Mersa Matruh.[9]

Join the two clauses with an and or a but?

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At that time, a troop of the regiment was sent to the Siwa Oasis at the edge of the Great Sand Sea.

Could substitute one "at" in this short sentence.

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At the beginning of September, the rest of the regiment – less another troop that remained at Mersa Matruh to calibrate its newly received guns[11] – moved forward to a position between the Axis-controlled Halfaya Pass and the Allied-held fortress of Sidi Barrani.[7][1]

The above two sucessive sentences start with "at" -> Think about replacing the second one with "in"?

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eastick took over the control of the artillery in the coastal sector, which included anti-tank and light anti-aircraft batteries.

The definite article before control is unneeded

Yes, deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The 2/7th Field Regiment again supported the 20th Brigade during the Second Battle of El Alamein in October and November 1942, firing 65,594 rounds across the 13 days of fighting.

Add the word "by" before firing

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The regiment also participated in the pursuit of the enemy as they withdrew, reaching El Dabaa.

For me, these two clauses do not tie toghether very well?

Better? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 December, Eastick was mentioned in despatches for "gallant and distinguished services in the Middle East during the period November 1941 to April 1942",[15] which recognised the high level of efficiency reached by the 2/7th Field Regiment under Eastick's command during that period.[1]

"during that period" strikes me as redundant?

Fair enough. Deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Service in the Pacific:

The 9th Division was responsible for administering the Japanese surrender in British Borneo including Sarawak, Brunei and Labuan Island, and the Natuna Islands.

Add a comma after "British Borneo"

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eastick was appointed commander of Kuching Force, responsible for the latter zone.

Replace the comma with and

Did something different, hopefully better now. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eastick was responsible for: accepting the surrender of the Japanese in his zone and interning them; releasing and evacuating around 2,017 Allied prisoners of war (POWs) and internees, including 400 stretcher cases and 237 women and children; and establishing military control in the zone.[24]

The colon is unnecessary

I disagree, it is a list of tasks and one of the individual list items has an internal comma. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was recalled to service in January 1950 with the rank of brigadier, and was posted as the commander of the Headquarters Group, Central Command, in Adelaide.

Drop the comma or add a subject to the last clause

Dropped. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From 1950 to 1954 he was the state president of RSSAILA,[1] and in Queen Elizabeth II's 1953 Coronation Honours he was appointed a Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George (CMG) for his work with the organisation.

Could substitute one "he"

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finished - Pendright (talk) 01:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Pendright, sorry it has taken so long to address these. All great points as always. See what you think of my responses/edits? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting with kind regards! Pendright (talk) 03:27, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Zawed

Lead

was appointed as a Companion of the Distinguished Service Order.: should that "as" be there?

Good point, it is more natural without. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Early life'

The Citizen Forces were renamed the Militia in 1929. In 1930, Eastick was promoted to major.: a couple of very short sentences, can I suggest combining them? Perhaps: "In 1930, Eastick was promoted to major in the Citizen Forces, which had been renamed to the Militia the previous year."

Went with something similar, thoughts?

'Service in the Middle East'

supported by the whole of the divisional artillery, part of the First Battle of El Alamein.: it seems to that there should be an "as" in front of the "part".

Good point. Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Service in the Pacific'

Suggest noting Kuching was the capital of Raj of Sarawak; helps explain the name of Kuching Force.

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the surrender of the Japanese, it is stated that Eastick flew to Kuching and then sailed back there, without indicating that he left.

Added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good to me, just a few nitpicks. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:48, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Peacemaker67: just a ping to check you have seen this? Zawed (talk) 08:52, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate, not sure how I missed these… onto it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zawed, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I do not anticipate opposing, just waiting for PM to come back to me on the above. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 02:46, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry guys, I have been incredibly busy in RW. I promise to get onto this imminently! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zawed. Thanks for your comments and my apologies for the delay. All done I reckon, have a look at my responses and edits and see what you think? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, these all look good so have added my support. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 00:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass

Will do soon. Hog Farm _Talk 22:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"A Call to the People of Australia, Australia, 1951, nla.obj-2545178137, retrieved 21 November 2021" - is Australia the correct publisher? Even if it's the national government, surely it was by an official department, not the country as a whole
Investigator Press is something I've never seen, but it appears to have been a legitimate publisher, so it looks fine

No red flags in source, although that "A Call to the People of Australia" ref looks a bit wonky on the formatting. Hog Farm _Talk 22:36, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Hog Farm. Australia is the location, not the publisher. Presumably the publisher is the various churchmen and justices that signed it. The citation is what is suggested for Wikipedia by the National Library of Australia website (the source) for this document. I think it just seems odd because it is a stand-alone document and doesn't have all the usual parameters. I have added an additional descriptive field. Investigator Press was a publisher that specialised in local history of South Australia. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:53, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.