Talk:Herbert Loper/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk • contribs) 08:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Progression

• Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
• Version of the article when review was closed: [2]

Technical review

• Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals no errors (no action required).
• Disambiguations: one dab links [3]:
  • Army of Occupation
• Linkrot: External links all check out [4] (no action required).
• Alt text: image lacks alt text so you might consider adding it [5] (suggestion only).
• Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool is currently not working so will AGF (no action required).

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • "He was ranked sixth in the class, in which Alfred Gruenther was fourth, and was commissioned as a second lieutenant." Why is Alfred Gruenther's ranking significant? Also the wording seems a little difficult and you might consider rewording. A suggestion: "He was ranked sixth in the class, and was commissioned as a second lieutenant; Alfred Gruenther was fourth."
    • Mentioning a more famous class member helps the reader place the subject. The only other really famous member of the class was General Anthony Clement "Nuts" McAuliffe (29) Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Not quite sure what you mean here: "Which USAFPOA was merged with..." is this possibly a typo?
    • Typo. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
  • "a retired Army Colonel", not sure about the capitalisation rank here should it "colonel" per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Military_terms?
    • Typo. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

  • Sufficient use of WP:RS and citations all follow a consistent style.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • The lead seems a little short to me, can more be added to summerise the article further per WP:LEAD?
    • Expanded the lead. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:43, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm not an expert on the subject, however the article itself seems to cover all the major aspects of Lopers life and his military service.
  • Minor points:
    • You might consider mentioning in the lead that the Mariana and Palau Islands campaign and the Okinawa campaigns occurred during World War II for additional context. A suggestion for the first sentence would be: "Herbert Bernard Loper (22 October 1896 – 25 August 1989) was a United States Army major general who helped plan the Mariana and Palau Islands campaign and the Okinawa campaign during World War II."
      • Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
    • "He remained at West Point as a student officer until 11 June 1919, when he again graduated"... why did he go back, in the previous paragraph he had just graduated? Was this perhaps some sort of post-graduate study?
      • Added explanation. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
    • "He was awarded a second Legion of Merit on 11 September 1948." Do we know what for?
      • The Occupation of Japan. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

  • No issues that I can see.

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

  • No issues here.

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain':

  • Image used is in the PD and seems appropriate for the article.

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

  • Overall this article is quite good. Just a couple of prose and MoS points and the issues with the lead to be resolved before it can be promoted though. Happy to discuss of course. Anotherclown (talk) 09:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
    • All points have been resolved and the lead has been expanded nicely, so I'm passing the review now. Thanks very much for your prompt replies. Anotherclown (talk) 12:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)