Talk:Nigel Cullen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Nigel Cullen has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
May 29, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nigel Cullen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 17:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I am reviewing this article. As it appears to fulfill the GA criteria, I have only a few comments.

  • All fair questions, Xtzou -- from the top...!
Early career
  • "Browned off" with transport duties - what does this mean?
    • Browned off is military slang for annoyed, fed up or just bored. I used it because it is a direct quote from the source, as well as apt given the military subject.
  • "He was "blooded"on 9 October" - what does this mean?
    • Blooded means to initiate into combat -- but I've also seen the term used in competitive sport, e.g. cricket.
  • "Cullen opened his account flying Hurricanes on 27 February" - is "opened his account" military terminology for something?
    • Used in the military, yes, but not exclusively -- also sport (again cricket for instance) I believe -- means opened his score (of victories in this case).
  • Since he flew for the RAF I am unclear why he is included in the official history of Australia in the war
    • Presumably because he was Australian-born, even though he served in the RAF (a great many Australians did in WWII) and is counted as an Australian ace.

Xtzou (Talk) 17:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Many tks for taking the time to review. Xtzou. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:48, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Reply Since "Browned off", "blooded", and "opened his account" appear to fall under "jargon" (or at least, are not understood by the general English-speaking reader - of which I am one), I think the terms should either be explained or linked to an explanation in the text. Xtzou (Talk) 00:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
    • For the first two, how about I use the Wiktionery links as I've done here? I could change the other to "opened his score" or something more obvious if you think necessary, I used "account" here because I'd said "score" a few times previously. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes, I would think you would want an article about a war hero to be accessible to the general reader. The use of jargon terms makes parts of it meaningless. Best, Xtzou (Talk) 13:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
    • Done as I proposed above. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks. A nice little article about a war here that conveys something of his personality. Xtzou (Talk) 14:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality: Clearly and concisely written
    B. MoS compliance: Complies with required elements of the MoS
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources: Reliable sources
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Well referenced
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects: Sets the context
    B. Focused: Remains focused on the topic
  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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: Pass!

Congratulations! Xtzou (Talk) 15:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Xtzou! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Nigel Cullen[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Nigel Cullen's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Boyne":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 17:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)