Talk:Phil Lamason/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Review[edit]

Before I start a review, can I ask on what basis this article is notable? It seems he was a good, but not extraordinary, officer in WW2. How is that notable? Noble Story (talk • contributions) 07:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are good secondary sources for what he did at Buchenwald. Wihtout that, I agree he would not be notable purely on the basis of his military career. David Underdown (talk) 12:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then, on with the review:

The full citation read:

Why is the full citation needed?

It seems to have become fairly standard in military bios to sue the citations when available. It's often the quickest and most straightforward way to explain exactly why someone was decorated, using a quote makes it clear we're not making any value judgement on the act of "heroism" just reporting how the military authorities viewed the action at the time. David Underdown (talk) 13:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lamason recalled:

Again, why can't you simply paraphrase?

In my opinion, having this section/quote complements the article, but I am happy to be guided by others. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many fliers were classified as "Terrorflieger" (terror flier) by the Germans, and were not given a trial. The German Foreign Office decided that captured enemy airmen should not be given the legal status of prisoner of war (POWs) but should instead be treated as criminals and spies.

Don't these 2 sentences say basically the same thing?

Lamason was amongst 168 allied airmen from Great Britain, United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand,[10] were taken by train from Fresnes Prison outside Paris, to Buchenwald concentration camp, arriving there on 20 August 1944.

The sentence basically says: "Lamason was amongst 168 allied airmen were taken by train". This is ungrammatical.

Fixed. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"arriving" -> "and arrived". Noble Story (talk • contributions) 06:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rectified. Spy007au (talk) 11:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buchenwald was a labor camp of about 60,000 inmates; mainly Russian POWs, but also common criminals, religious prisoners (including Jews), and various political prisoners from Germany, France, Poland, and Czechoslovakia.

If you're going to have a semicolon, the part after it needs to be a complete sentence; the one you have now is not.

Fixed. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After their first meal, Lamason stepped forward and stated:

Again, why needed?

See my comments above re paraphrasing. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I mean why do you need to say that he said "we are in a fix". It doesn't seem exceedingly relevant. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 06:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His leadership boosted the airmen's morale and gave them hope.[12] Lamason instilled a level of discipline and bearing.

2 short sentences, could be combined.

Rectified. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the first assignments Lamason gave was to mount a guard detail, both day and night, to prevent pilfering by other prisoners,

Pilfering from whom?

I have changed "prisoners" to "inmates", to make it clearer. Spy007au (talk) 15:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe say: "pilfering among the inmates" to make it even clearer. 116.48.10.36 (talk) 06:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I must be missing something here, as I think it currently reads OK. Spy007au (talk) 12:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most doubted they would ever get out of Buchenwald

Who were "most"? It's not clear.

Rectified. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eventually, his persistence paid off and on the night of 19 October, 156 of the 168 airmen were transferred from Buchenwald to Stalag Luft III by the Luftwaffe.

You need to say if Lamason was among those 156 or not.

Rectified. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"including Lamason" needs commas around it. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 06:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

However, the RNZAF refused.

Shouldn't it be Lamason refusing?

According to Burgess (1995, p. 162), it was the RNZAF who refused. Spy007au (talk) 15:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In 1999, the German government paid 34.5 million Deutsche Marks in reparations to various survivors of the Holocaust who were U.S. citizens. American POWs who had been sent to Buchenwald were among those who received reparations.

If this didn't include Lamason, how is this relevant?

Agreed, I have removed the sentence. 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One captured British airman, Pilot Officer S.A. Spierenburg, was a Dutchman flying for the Royal Air Force. Spierenburg, who spoke fluent German, regularly acted as an interpretor for Lamason when he negotiated with the camp authorities.

Needs a ref.

I have attached a link [1] showing that Spierenburg was a pilot for the RAF. I have also attached a link [2] showing he was taken to Buchenwald. Burgess (1995) states several times in his book that Spierenburg spoke fluent German and acted as Lamason's interpretor. I am having difficulty added these references to the notes section, so perhaps someone could assist. Thanks, Spy007au (talk) 15:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Spy007au (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noble Story (talk • contributions) 13:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thansk for the feedback and critique. I will address these issues in the next few days as spare time permits. Regards, Spy007au (talk) 00:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will address the remaining issues shortly. Regards, 124.182.230.120 (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I should have signed in. Spy007au (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Comments[edit]

Lamason did not do this just to improve their morale but because he saw it also as his responsibility to carry on his war duties despite these adverse circumstances.[4] Lamason's leadership boosted the airmen's morale and gave them hope while instilling a level of discipline and bearing.

"these" -> "the", "saw it also" -> "also saw it". Also, I think the first sentence could be improved. You mention "improve their morale", and then say later "boosted the airmen's morale", which is repetition. Could be reworded.

All rectified. Spy007au (talk) 11:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At great risk, Lamason also got word out to the German Luftwaffe of their captivity at the camp.

Using "also" here is not really logically correct, since it connects that sentence to the previous one, and those two here don't really fit together.

Rectified. Spy007au (talk) 11:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown to all except Lamason, their execution had been scheduled at Buchenwald for 26 October.

Maybe instead of saying "had been scheduled", you could say definitely "they were executed", as the way it is now, it's a little unclear if they were executed or not. In fact, you need to explain that. Obviously, Lamason lived on afterwards, so what happened to their supposed execution?

Rectified. Spy007au (talk) 11:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In April 2005, Lamason, then 86, recollected the events of Buchenwald on TV New Zealand.

You shouldn't have 1-sentence paragraphs.

Rectified. Spy007au (talk) 11:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noble Story (talk • contributions) 06:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your continued feedback and critique. Please let me know if you require any further edits. Regards, Spy007au (talk) 11:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now, looks like a winner to me. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 12:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]