Talk:Stephen J. Chamberlin/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This GA Review is initially of version 431431647

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    The article was checked against Microsoft Word and the following issues were found:
    In the sentence "After the war he attended the Command and General Staff School at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and served on the staff of the Chief of Infantry in the War Department." consider using a comma after "After the war".
    Issue resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "In this role he was responsible for planning and overseeing execution of MacArthur's major operations, including the New Guinea, Philippines and Borneo campaigns." consider using a comma after "In this role".
    Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "Chamberlin Was Director Of The Intelligence Division, G-2, on the War Department General Staff from 1946 to 1948, when he became commander of the Fifth Army." consider changing "Director Of The Intelligence Division" to "Director of the Intelligence Division"; the sentence has also been tagged as a fragment sentence, please revise it accordingly.
    Issue resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "He retired in September, 1951, and was then employed as chief of security for the U.S. Air Force's Arnold Engineering Development Center at Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee." consider dropping the comma after Septemeber.
    Issue resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "On returning to the United States in January 1922 he joined the staff of 19th Infantry Brigade at Fort McPherson, Georgia." consider placing a comma after 1922.
    Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "From 1924 to 1925 he attended the Command and General Staff School at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, graduating as an Honor Graduate." consider placing a comma after 1925.
    Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "He served on the staff of the Chief of Infantry in the War Department from 1926 to 1930, then commanded a battalion of the 22nd Infantry from 1930 to 1932." consider replacing "1930, then commanded" with "1930, and then commanded".
    Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "At this time the United States was embarking on a military build up in response to a worsening international situation, which culminated in the outbreak of World War II on 1 September 1939." replace "build up" with "buildup; within the same sentence consider using a coma after "At this time".
    Issues resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "Chamberlin disagreed on the grounds that paint would reduce maintenance costs." consider replacing "on the grounds" with "because".
    In the sentence "Their decentralised mode of planning was entirely different from the top-down approach used by GHQ, and Chamberlin found this a source of great frustration, as it was difficult to extract information from them." decentralised is mispelled, the correct spelling is decentralized.
    Issue resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "When MacArthur began looking for a new chief of staff to replace Lieutenant General Richard K. Sutherland in 1945, he consider but rejected giving the post to Chamberlin." consider replacing consider with considers.
    Issue resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "Chamberlin became Deputy Chief of Staff in February 1946, and was briefly acting as Chief of Staff from 2 May to 10 June 1946." consider replacing was with were.
    Disregard. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "He retired in September, 1951, and was then employed as chief of security for the U.S. Air Force's Arnold Engineering Development Center at Arnold Air Force Base, Tennessee." consider removing the comma after September.
    Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "From June 1946 to October 1948 Chamberlin Was Director Of The Intelligence Division, G-2, on the War Department General Staff." consider replacing "Director Of The Intelligence Division" with "Director of the Intelligence Division".
    Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    In the sentence "In 1949 he was chairman of a general officer committee that researched the role of race in the Army, and produced a report favoring the continuation of segregation and the maintenance of a quota that limited the number of African-Americans who could serve in uniform." consider using a comma after 1949. Issue resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    LEAD: Symbol support vote.svg
    LAYOUT: Symbol support vote.svg
    WORDS: Symbol support vote.svg
    Per Puffery the sentence "Their decentralised mode of planning was entirely different from the top-down approach used by GHQ, and Chamberlin found this a source of great frustration, as it was difficult to extract information from them." was flagged for the usage of the word great.
    Issue resolved. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
    Writing about fiction: Symbol support vote.svg
    Embedded lists: Symbol support vote.svg
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    No issues observed.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    There are multiple sentences that maybe challenged that are not given in-line citations from reliable sources:
    From 1924 to 1925 he attended the Command and General Staff School at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, graduating as an Honor Graduate.
    To save on the cost of cantonments, Moore decided not paint them. Chamberlin disagreed on the grounds that paint would reduce maintenance costs.
    Chamberlin jealously guarded his position.
    One of Chamberlin's challenges was working with the Australians. Their decentralised mode of planning was entirely different from the top-down approach used by GHQ, and Chamberlin found this a source of great frustration, as it was difficult to extract information from them.
    From June 1946 to October 1948 Chamberlin Was Director Of The Intelligence Division, G-2, on the War Department General Staff.
    As of 19 JUL 2011 issues have not been resolved.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
    C. No original research:
    No issues observed.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    No issues observed.
    B. Focused:
    Quotes in World War II section could be shortened, or removed.
    Disregard. Explanation given by nominating editor sufficiently describes reason for inclusion, in my humble opinion. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    No issues observed.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    No issues observed.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    No issues observed.
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    No issues observed.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    There are a number of issues that need to be addressed prior to reassessing and seeing if this article passes the GA requirements.
    Rechecked version 436562389. The article is progressing well given the suggested improvements. There are still a few concerns that need to be addressed, and questions to be answered. Please see what has not been struck above, and the reply below.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)</>
    Rechecked version 436599597. The article continues to progress well. That being said it is the opinion of this reviewer that certain sentences should be provided in line references, as it is the opinion of this user that those sentences that are likely to be challenged in the future. Please help improve this article by providing said in line references/citations. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
    As of the most recent edit, and there being no recent changes since to attempt to resolve the request for inline citations for sentences that maybe challenged in the future, I unfortunately am not going to pass this article at this time. This article is well on its way towards becoming a GA article given some minor tweaks and would look forward to it being passed once the above issues are resolved. That being said, more than enough time has passed for improvement to occur, and improvement not occurring. Please do try again.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Response

1A: All done, except for two where MS Word's suggestion is grammatically incorrect.
1B: Removed word
2B: These sentences already have references. These are placed at the end of the paragraph per MOS.
3B: Keeping the quotes. These provide a view of his performance as a staff officer.

Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Re, 1A: Which two? How so?
  1. "he consider but rejected giving the post to Chamberlin" The suggestion "considers" is wrong; the correct tense was "considered", which was done;
  2. "and was briefly acting as Chief of Staff" The suggestion of replacing "was" with "were" is incorrect.
Re, 1B: Please provide a diff for each change. It's not necessary but it'll make it easier to check your work.
Re, 2B: They may be referenced at the end of the paragraph, but having references after the sentences, as is done elsewhere in the article, would stop future editors from challenging those specific sentences in the future.
Re, 3B: That's an editorial judgement that I am OK to pass. But I must ask, why are the views of those individuals more important than others who interacted with the subject? Where there negative views as well? Should those negative vies be given due weight in the article? If not, why not? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  • The first one is from the man himself. It is defensive in tone, but sumarises both sides of the argument.
  • The second is from Rogers, who is our best source for the inner workings of GHQ. It is balanced in tone.
The article attempts to take a neutral point of view. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Please see WP:INCITE:

If a word or phrase is particularly contentious, an inline citation may be added next to that word or phrase within the sentence, but it is usually sufficient to add the citation to the end of the sentence or paragraph, so long as it's clear which source supports which part of the text.

References can be placed at the end of the sentence or end of the paragraph. As seen in this article, there are some sentences within a paragraph that are individually sourced already. Asking for individual sources for sentences which maybe challenged in the future is not an unreasonable request. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)