Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Anotherclown (talk) 10:28, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer[edit]

Nominator(s): MisterBee1966 (talk)


Schnaufer was the leading German World War II night fighter pilot. I recently expanded the article and it was peer reviewed and just passed the GA review. I hope it also meets the more stringent A-class criteria of the military history project. Thanks to all willing to review. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:25, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments from Hchc2009[edit]

  • Images look fine, although File:Kammhuber Line Map - Agent Tegal.png needs a German tag as well as the Crown Copyright tag (the UK one covers the photograph, but the photograph was of an original German map, which would carry its own copyright). Hchc2009 (talk) 15:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am not sure how to address this. Can you point to an example of what you intend to achieve. Sorry for my lack of knowledge. MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not an expert on tags, but you would be looking for one that said "PD in Germany" or something like that, either because of its age, or because it was produced by the Nazi government, I suspect. Might be worth asking at the Commons if you get stuck. Hchc2009 (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • It should be {{Anonymous-EU}}, which should satisfy the requirement for Germany, but we also need to establish that it is PD in the US (since Wikimedia's servers are in the US). That basically means we need to establish that it was PD in 1996, else its copyright would have been extended by the URAA. For that, we'd need an assertion from whoever holds the actual map (presumably somewhere in the British National Archives or the IWM) that it constitutes seized Nazi property and thus ineligible for copyright in the UK and US (similar to this photo or any of the Heinrich Hoffmann photos, for example). Parsecboy (talk) 12:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Hm, I am not sure if I am in the position to establish this. I noticed that the same image, although different color scheme, is published here. Unfortunately the up-loader of the image at Wikipedia, Ian Dunster (talk · contribs), has retired from Wikipedia. It also seems that the user has a track record of questionable uploads. I will therefore remove the image for now, unless someone is able to establish its safe use. MisterBee1966 (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

  • The lead image seems rather large, probably because it's so tall - is there any way to reduce it slightly? I don't know exactly how the military person infobox works exactly.
  • "Operation Cerberus (Channel Dash..." - this formatting makes it look like "Channel Dash" is the translation of Cerberus (to those who are unfamiliar with what Cerberus is, which I imagine is a great quantity of our readers)
    • reworded MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's better, but on looking at it again, I think the parenthetical date should come after the first mention of the Channel Dash - otherwise it sort of looks like the date range refers to the period when the operation was code-named Cerberus. Parsecboy (talk) 17:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Check for duplicate links - there are a few (Nuremberg, United States Army Air Forces, and others)
  • Lichtenstein is not italicized on the first mention but is later on.
  • I've made a handful of changes, mostly for grammar and the like - make sure they're all ok.
  • I don't have a problem with the quote from the Wehrmachtbericht but I know other editors will probably oppose it at FAC (or at least I did with Tirpitz and Bismarck). Just something to think about. Parsecboy (talk) 15:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

  • As the war progressed, he accumulated further victories and was given leadership responsibilities, at first as a technical officer, then as a squadron leader and group commander. I'd trim the bit about leadership responsibilities and say only that he later became a squadron leader and group commander.
  • After completing his six grade What does this mean?
  • Capitalize flight training regiment since you've identified a particular one and do the same for the other units that you mention by number or name.
  • (left tube) indicated other aircraft ahead as bumbs. (centre tube) indicated range to a specific target and whether they were higher or lower. (right tube) indicated whether the target was to left or right. Is this caption supposed to be three sentences or three clauses in one sentence?
  • headlights Do you mean landing lights?
  • Not sure that the reader needs names of British casualties of Schnaufer's victories. If you do use their initials, add periods after their names.
    • Thanks, I added their names because I ran into this when reading Hinchliffe's book. Added the periods, done. MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't capitalize first wave.
  • Watch your possessives: Bomber Commands attack on Düsseldorf
  • Are the circumstances of Gardiewski's loss relevant for Schnaufer? The occasion certainly is, but I don't think that the details are.
    • Hm, if it wasn't for Gardiewski's loss, the position would not have been vacant at the time. So it was an opportunistic advancement in Schnaufer's career. MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Much like the von Strachwitz article, this too is lengthy and extraneous details like rescued by an RAF rescue boat really aren't relevant to Schnaufer's career and life. The fact that Gardiewski was shot down is hugely important, as you state, but nothing else about the shootdown is.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Acknowledge, thanks for your opinion. I put the info in a footnote for those readers, like myself, who want to know what happened to the guy. I hope this strikes an acceptable compromise. MisterBee1966 (talk) 20:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Provide a conversion from metric into English units for 6-ton load.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:00, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • In lead, suggest "He was awarded the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross on 31 December 1943 for reaching 42 aerial victories." The current wording is a little unclear.
  • Knights Cross is overlinked in the lead

Early life

  • suggest "in 1919, shortly after World War I."; "until the children" ("her" begs the question of who the father was); "Nazi State" should probably be "Nazi state"; "In November 1939, aged seventeen, he graduated with his Abitur (diploma) with distinction"; "In 1939 Schnaufer" needs a comma after 1939.
  • Also in Early life: suggest "The Potsdam-based Flying Platoon (Fliegerzug) centralised all the Napola flyers." is very clumsy, and I'm not sure about the initial caps on "Flying Platoon".
  • more to come tomorrow."graduation from school" needs a comma after school.
  • replace "present-day" with "now"
  • "At Wunstorf, Schnaufer"
  • drop "aerial" before radio, unnecessary
  • replace "in defence of" with "to defend against"
  • Training at night focused on night
  • Fw 58 is overlinked
  • done to end of Early life, more to come

World War II

  • "In November 1941" needs a comma after 1941
  • I think "the" in front of roman numerals is grammatically incorrect, as II doesn't mean 2nd per se. It is also usual in English for groups and squadrons to referred to as "Ninety Two Wing" for example, to I think you can dispense with "the" in front of II, 5. etc.
    • I don't fully agree, check Nomenclature used by the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS MisterBee1966 (talk) 10:24, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • The II./NJG 1 saw little action in the first few months of 1943, and Schnaufer did not claim his next aerial victory until 14 May 1943. The II./NJG 1 Himmelbett control areas The first usage reads oddly, and is not how I see the unit name rendered in English translations of German books. The second usage is perfectly fine. For Anglophone designations we'd use the ordinal form of the unit designation with "the", like "The 122nd did"..., and the German ordinal period just doesn't register as such for English readers.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Agree with Sturm, "II./NJG 1 saw little action..." is preferable to "the II./NJG 1 saw little action..."
  • night fighter intercept tactics... itstheir early...
  • comma after July 1040
  • it wasn't Schnaufer's Gruppe, I'd drop "Schnaufer" where you have done this (a couple of spots)
  • suggest "for the most part were" becomes "were usually"
  • While Lieutenant General is the literal translation of Generalleutnant, the equivalent Western rank in WWII is actually Major General.
  • comma after Conceptually
  • suggest "Flight operations were also hindered by bad weather in the first months of 1942, so II./NJG 1 only saw very limited action during that period."
  • RAF and Gruppenkommandeur are overlinked
  • Knights Cross is overlinked at the bottom of Group commander... subsection
  • NJG 4 is overlinked at top of its section
  • Oberst is overlinked in the NJG 4 subsection
  • POW is overlinked in that section
  • more to come.
  • suggest "On 8 February 1942, II. Gruppe was transferred to Koksijde Air Base without having scored any victories while stationed at Sint-Truiden."
  • "On the evening of 12 February" needs a comma after it
  • "On the afternoon of 13 February" does too.
  • Not sure what "and relocated to Westerland on the island of Sylt" means. Did they recon the island, or based themselves off of it?
    • Westerland is a town with an air base on Sylt. I don't understand the question. MisterBee1966 (talk) 05:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comma after "In total"
  • "They" is being used to refer to Schnaufer and his radio op (I assume), it is confusing and could be read to mean the staffel. I suggest the couple of sentences beginning "On the afternoon of 13 February..." need re-writing for clarity. I would, but I really don't understand what he did.
  • they "returned to 5. Staffel's new base" if it was new, had they been there before? Confusing.
  • Comma after "On 14 February"
  • "These decisions,..."
  • Comma after "crews were deployed"
  • suggest "left out" instead of "bypassed"
  • suggest " although the attacking force actually numbered"
  • "The Halifax went into flamescaught on fire"
  • "who had hoped that the bullet lodged in his calf would isolate itself", not sure isolate is the best word. expel, heal? Not sure what you mean.
  • Comma after "From 29 November to 16 December 1942"
  • suggest "Between 14 May to 3 October 1943, Schnaufer claimed 21 further aerial victories in Rumpelhardt's absence."
  • "12 of which with"
  • "radio operators"
  • Errant apostrophe in "flight's"
  • Comma after "first few months of 1943"
  • "areas where located"
  • "in that directionregion"
  • Comma after "Consequently"
  • Comma after "On the night of 29/30 May"
  • Comma after "In June 1943", "Düsseldorf" and "However"
  • suggest "shot down a Stirling from No. 218 Squadron on 22 June 1943 at 01:33"
  • Comma after "On 29 June 1943"
  • "up to 17.seventeen."
  • suggest "Following Baro as his radio operatorHis next radio operator"
  • Comma after "In mid-July"
  • "as Schnaufer's radio operator and thehis last..."
  • down to 12./NJG 1, more to come.
    • Thanks for all the effort so far MisterBee1966 (talk) 11:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • No worries, a very interesting read.
  • "perceived to beas arrogant"
  • "Although uncertain" - why? Records incomplete or destroyed?
  • "two-man"
  • "over a No. 218 Squadron..." what? Lanc? Halifax?
  • "claimed two aerial victories on 9 October for aerial victories 29 and 30" is repetitive
  • Generalmajor was equivalent to Brigadier or Brigadier General.
  • down to Group commander, more to come.
  • suggest "On 6 June 1944, the Western Allies landed in Normandy, during Operation Overlord."
  • "invasion of Normandy, the Supreme Allied Commander" not "Invasion of Normandy"
  • "to support of the ground forces"
  • suggest "On the night of 12/13 June, Schnaufer claimed his first victory following the invasion when 671 bombers attacked various railway targets in France."
  • suggest "Schnaufer claimed three bombers shot down that night, the first a Lancaster and the second and third as a Lancaster or a Halifax, between 00:27 and 00:34."?
  • "For Schnaufer, July 1944"
    • done 04:49, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comma after "On 2 September" and after "on 9 October 1944"
  • Bochum doesn't appear to be linked?
  • Commas after "In recognition of this achievement"
  • down to Wing commander subsection. (BTW, the English/German section headings are confusing, English only for section headings.
  • "at (the age of) 22"
  • suggest "as well as the" should be "and"
  • "Gütterloh" should be "Gütersloh"
  • "He surpassed Oberst Helmut Lent's, killed in a flying accident on 7 October 1944, record of 102 nocturnal victories after he claimed three Lancasters shot down from a force of 235 Lancasters from No 5. Group which attacked the Dortmund-Ems Canal." should be "Schnaufer surpassed Oberst Helmut Lent's record of 102 night-time victories, after he claimed three Lancasters shot down from a force of 235 Lancasters from No 5. Group which attacked the Dortmund-Ems Canal on 6 November 1944."
  • "It was thehis first month"
  • suggest "in an enemy facing position" should be "fighting the enemy"
  • down to Later life and death, more to come.
  • "managed to make contact towith"
  • "in the London's"

General comments

  • Gerber appears to be self-published.
    • I am unsure what you mean? I am not using any reference called Gerber. If you are referring to Berger, yes it is self published. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • no dablinks
  • checklinks all ok
  • some alt text needed on images per this
  • no copyvios detected
  • I'm done, a few points to be addressed. Great article! Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:32, 5 April 2014 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Heinz-Wolfgang_Schnaufer&oldid=603130629"