Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Leonard W. Murray/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 16 March 2023 [1].

Leonard W. Murray[edit]

Nominator(s): Friendofleonard (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a significant Canadian military figure, Rear-Admiral Leonard W. Murray, Commander-in-Chief of the Northwest Atlantic, architect of the Battle of the Atlantic, and the only Canadian to have commanded a Theatre of War in WW1 or WW2. It is proposed for featuring on the anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic on 8 May 2023. Friendofleonard (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination[edit]

  • Hi Friendofleonard, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Gog the Mild. As you can see the article is very substantially referenced, and has benefited from the detailed (and much appreciated) review by Hawkeye, who recommended additional sources be identified for several statements. I think that the tagging follows the text-source integrity guidelines - but that would of course be good to check. Some of the references are to documents in National or Navy archives and not to other published work - but I do not think they are "original research" in that they simply provide evidence for statements (like the dates when medals were awarded) or quotes. I obtained peer review by three Canadian naval historians, and I have done a lot of work tidying up the article (SchroCat, Hawkeye) for format, links, bibliography etc. The only thing left to do is to review the copyright links recommended by Nikkimaria. I will let you know when that has been done. Friendofleonard (talk) 15:13, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    All of the recommended edits have been completed, copyrights checked, and the page has been added to the FA queue for recommended publication on 8 May. Please let me know if there is anything missing or out of place. Friendofleonard (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Passing comment. I’ve closed the PR properly and made the correction on the article talk page too. My oppose comment last time stated the lead was too short. It still is. It doesn’t summarise the article, which it should. I don’t fully grasp all the differences between British and Canadian English, but I would have thought one served on a ship, not in one. - SchroCat (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the suggestion regarding the intro section, and for properly removing the PR. On the "in" vs "on", I did initially put "on" but a Canadian naval historian suggested that I change them all to "in" which is what they say in the navy - apparently. Friendofleonard (talk) 04:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you want to see a good and complete lead, have a look at William D. Leahy, another article at FAC on a naval officer. It gives the reader a potted summary of the whole article, not just one aspect and is one you should look at before expanding Murray's lead. - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks SchroCat. It was useful to look at Leahy and the lead has now been further built up. I must admit I thought the lead was supposed to be more of a two-sentence header than a full summary. Friendofleonard (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Murry,_Admiral_L.W..jpg needs a US tag and a publication date. Ditto File:Midshipmen-royal-naval-college-halifax.jpg
  • File:HMS_Iron_Duke_(1912).jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published?
  • File:Commodore_Leonard_Murray_c_1942.jpg: who is believed to be the copyright holder? Ditto File:Murray_and_Muselier_c_1942.jpg, File:Murray_Building_S-15_CFB_Halifax.jpg
  • File:Photo_of_the_Admiral_Murray_memorial_in_Nova_Scotia.jpg: what's the copyright status of the plaque?
  • File:Order_of_the_Bath_UK_ribbon.svg is too simple to warrant copyright protection. Ditto File:Order_of_the_British_Empire_(Military)_Ribbon.png, File:Ribbon_-_1914_Star.png, File:Ribbon_-_British_War_Medal.png, File:Ribbon_-_War_Medal.png, File:Canadian_Volunteer_Service_Medal_BAR_2.svg, File:UK_King_George_VI_Coronation_Medal_ribbon.svg, File:UK_King_George_V_Silver_Jubilee_Medal_ribbon.svg, File:Legion_Honneur_Commandeur_ribbon.svg
  • File:Croix_de_guerre_1939-1945_with_palm_France_-_ribbon_bar.svg: what's the copyright status of the original work? Ditto File:Haakon_VIIs_frihetskors_stripe.svg. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the review suggestions. I will get onto it over the weekend. I might come back to you for some advice although I will try to figure it out for myself. One of the complications is that many of the historical photos were in my family's possession and then handed over by my family to the Canadian government, which "owns" them now. Their original authors are not known (and the historical pix are over 70 years old). As for the medals, these were added by a different editor and I know nothing at all about their origins. But I will see what I can do for sure. Friendofleonard (talk) 04:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed pix sizes removed, alt text added, and all the copyrights have been reviewed and cleaned up. Except the medals. All the medal images are from existing wikicommons records that I do not manage. Thanks Nikkimaria Friendofleonard (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the images are to be used in this article, they do need to be tagged correctly, even if you weren't the original uploader.
A bunch of the other images are still missing publication dates. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Hawkeye7[edit]

Lead

  • "playing a key role in negotiations with the USA" See MOS:NOTUSA
  • Lead is too short. Suggest adding:
    His graduation from the RNC, RNSC and IDC
  • Something about his interwar service
    The Saint Pierre and Miquelon and the Halifax incidents

- All done, although the St Pierre and Miquelon incident is not really a central part of the career, it is more of a human interest anecdote Friendofleonard (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early years to the end of World War I

- done

  • Consider making the quote a regular quotation. ie without quotation marks or the final attribution.

- I think I prefer to leave it as a quote to match the style of 3 or 4 other quotes in the text, not all of which are quotes by Murray himself. Willing to reconsider if this is not good practice Friendofleonard (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Immediately after graduating in January 1913,[4] Murray first served as a Midshipman in the Royal Navy vessel HMS Berwick" Delete "first" as a tautology; decapitalise "midshipman"; link "Royal Navy"; comma after "Berwick"

- done

  • Can we say what type of ships these were?

- added, and added also to all the other ships in the artricle. Willing to revert if this over-encumbers the text

  • "the newly elected Government of Sir Robert Borden" This is unclear; wasn't he elected in 1911? Was he knighted at the time referred to? He wasn't knighted until June 1914. (Aside: I never knew Canadian PMs were knighted.)

- done

  • Suggest splitting paragraph at "On 14 August 1914". Consider creating a World War I section.

- done - good idea thanks

  • "Midshipman Murray" Just "Murray"

- done

  • "HMCS Niobe" Only link and add the "HMCS" on first appearance.

- done (if I understand correctly, only linking on first appearance and elsewhere just appearing as the ship name in italics without HMCS or link)

  • " Acting Sub-Lieutenant" De-capitalise but link "acting sub-lieutenant"

- done

  • "Lieutenant" Same.

- done

  • "as Lieutenant" Wasn't he already?

- fixed - he was actually promoted in Jan 1917, earlier he was a full sub-lieutenant

  • Suggest splitting the paragraph at "After HMCS Niobe"

- done

  • "set up troop convoys across the Atlantic to outwit German U-boats." I don't think that is how the convoy system worked. Rewrite this.

- indeed, rephrased

  • Link "Scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow"

- done

  • Rear admiral or rear-admiral?

- changed to Rear Admiral when it is a person's title (caps) and rear admiral when the generic position is described

Between the wars

  • Again, for each ship, state what time of ship it was

- done

  • Link "Captain", "Master of the Fleet"

- done

  • Split paragraph at "Thus it was that,"

-done

-done

  • " In January 1925, Murray was promoted to lieutenant-commander ... In 1927, Murray returned to the UK" Avoid starting consecutive sentences with the same words. Suggest "He returned to the UK in 1927"

-done

-done

  • " In August 1938, in the middle of a final year at the Imperial Defence College," Wait, you haven't said he entered the IDC. You could say more about this. There were two representatives from Canada each year.

- edited - it seems that this was a one-year course since we he was aboard Iron Duke until Jan 1938

  • " as a Captain" lowercase. Sigh.

-done, sorry

World War II and the Battle of the Atlantic

  • "1939-42" -> "1939-1942" "1942–45" -> "1942–1945" (MOS:RANGES)
  • How large was the RCN in 1939?

- info added

  • Unlink "Royal Navy"

- done

  • "strategy that was eventually so successful" Footnote required here

- added

- done

  • " Joint Chiefs of Staff meetings" What Joint Chiefs of Staff are we talking about here?

- good catch: clarified it was a meeting of the two chiefs of staff

  • Split the paragraph after "until the spring of 1944"

- done

  • Link "Canadian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom"

- done

  • State who Lester B. Pearson was

- done

  • Lowercase "Commodore"

- done

  • "to serve convoy duty" -> "to serve on convoy duty"

- done

- done

  • "planning of an Atlantic strategy" Footnote required

- added

  • " American Admiral Arthur L. Bristol" "Rear Admiral"

- done

  • "in order to retain seniority in relation to Admiral Bristol" This does not make sense. How does promoting him to the same rank "retain seniority"? (Also delete "Admiral")

- clarified

  • "the Free French Admiral Muselier" -> "Free French Vice Admiral Émile Muselier"

- done

- done

  • "pushing the Vichy government into an openly pro-German stance." Reference required for this paragraph!

- reference added

  • Muselier's claim to have nothing to do with it is extraordinary (ie utterly unbelievable) and will require a better source

- another good catch. The text was ambiguous and now clarified. Muselier always admitted he did it, what he said was that Murray had nothing to do with it

- removed

  • Move the Atlantic Convoy image to the right to avoid sandwiching

- done

  • Murray was made Commander-in-Chief Canadian Northwest Atlantic." You need to repeat the claim in the Lead that he was "the only Canadian to command an Allied theatre of operations during World War II". With a reference.

- bith added

  • Link " First Sea Lord"

- done

  • "167 merchant ships (1,500,000 long tons (1,500,000 t))." I don't think this is correct. I think this was Deadweight tonnage

- reference to tonnage not verified and removed

  • "VE Day and early retirement" Suggest indenting to place under the Second World War section

- done

  • "Naval Board of Inquiry under Admiral Brodeur" "Rear-Admiral Victor Brodeur"
  • Consider adding his CBE citation

- Considered, but I think it is a bit long and would not really fit here in the text (since it was awarded much earlier in his career). Also, if I add one then why not all?

Later years

  • "to care for his ailing wife, who died in 1962" Did they have any children?

- added references to his two sons - who were both Royal Navy officers

  • His Croix de guerre (France) is in the infobox but not the article. Sources required for some of his other decorations. But note that this medal bar is the only source for some of the decorations. I would remove the medal bar, which adds nothing, leaving only the table.

- I have cleaned up all the medal citations and award dates (where known) based on his service records. I prefer to keep the medal arrangement as it matches the uniform in the War Museum, which is kind of cool I think Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Hawkeye, I will get onto it early this coming week. Friendofleonard (talk) 22:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Notes

  • fn 21, 30, 31, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63 Publisher?
  • fn 22, 50, 59, 66, 67, 68 Source?
  • fn 27 Page number?
  • fn 30, 38, 60 Access date?
  • fn 32. Should be "pp. 9-10"
  • fn 48. Remove the book details - they are down below. But we do need the page number.
  • fn 64, 65 Move this into the text.

References

  • Barnett, Correlli, "The Partnership Between Canada and Britain in Winning the Battle of the Atlantic". Add URL to the article (https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1365&context=cmh). Link Correlli Barnett. Add pages (pp. 5-18) Put article name in quotes and Italicize the journal name instead.
  • Fry, Major D.G., MURRAY, The Sentinel, Volume 8, Issue 4, April 1972. Not used in the article - remove
  • German, Tony, The sea is at our gates: The History of the Canadian Navy Title case.
  • Glover, William, "Royal Colonial or Royal Canadian Navy?" Chapter name in quotes.
  • Lund is not used. Remove or move to a "Further reading" section.
  • Milner. Chapter name in quotes. Use title case.
  • Sarty is not used. Remove or move to a "Further reading" section.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Many many thanks for your diligent review - I have learned a lot about the coding and hope that everything is now super sharp Friendofleonard (talk) 13:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Harrias[edit]

Too many immediate issues for me on this one.

  • Lots of WP:OVERLINKing.
  • Some weird phrasing, such as "in armoured cruiser HMS Essex."
  • Quite a lot of seemingly unsourced content, as no inline citations provided.
  • I find the quality of the prose to be below that required for Featured status.
  • The citations are poorly formatted, often omitting multiple pieces of information.

Should sweeping improvements be made, I'd be happy to come back for a more detailed review, but in the current state I simply think this article isn't ready for the FA process. Harrias (he/him) • talk 19:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Harrias for these comments. Some of the elements you have signaled were added as a result of recommendations from other reviewers, especially the addition of links to naval ranks and the inclusion (and linking) of ship types – like the “armoured cruiser HMS Essex.” This might be what has increased the sense of overlinking. Regarding inline citations, there are about 80, but more can certainly be added. However I would want to avoid looking as if there are too many inline citations (as well as too much overlinking). Could you help me understand what is the desired density of inline citations, and also give examples of poor formatting (missing information)? And finally, regarding the quality of the prose, I would definitely appreciate your concrete advice on this. Revisions have been made as a result of detailed review by Hawkeye, and I do not know if you were looking at the latest version of the article or at an archived version that was frozen for the FA review process. I have been over the article so many times now that I think a strong external editor might be the best way forward. Thanks again Harrias, and I look forward to your further advice on these elements. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Ian[edit]

Recusing coord duties to review, I must also regretfully oppose, at this stage primarily on prose, tone, and referencing. It looks to me that too much emphasis has been placed on getting this to TFA by a certain date and this has resulted in the article being under-prepared for FAC. I realise this was put up for PR and got no comments but then actively seeking comment from around the traps, or taking to MilHist A-Class Review, would've been better than coming straight to FAC. I started copyediting the lead but stopped as I think it needs a better going-over. Some specifics:

  • From there, he was reassigned to command positions on Canada's east coast, initially in command of the Newfoundland Escort Force, then Commanding Officer Atlantic Coast. -- "reassigned" suggests failure in the previous position but I doubt this is meant; "command positions" tends to obviate the need for "command of" and "Commanding Officer".
  • Following the Atlantic Convoy Conference of March 1943, Murray was appointed Commander-in-Chief, Canadian Northwest Atlantic, and successfully led Canadian, British, American and other Allied naval and air forces to victory in the Battle of the Atlantic. -- "successfully" is redundant if the efforts resulted in victory.
  • Three or four block quotes from the subject seems like overkill and over-reverence. I certainly don't think we need an entire section devoted to a quote.
  • One of these block quotes is introduced with the statement his continuing interest in the offensive merit of convoys over patrols is evident: -- this looks like essay language, inappropriate for an encyclopedia.
  • Several paragraphs don't end in citations, and that needs to be rectified.
  • We shouldn't have a citation on a header as we do with Awards and decorations -- it looks like the source is cited in the section anyway.
  • This is not an actionable objection because AFAIK there's no rule against it in WP but the medal bars and ribbons in the Awards and decorations really do seem more appropriate for a children's book than an encyclopedia. Obviously the above-and-beyond-the-call-of-duty awards are important but they appear in the infobox and are mentioned (or should be) in the main body. The service or campaign medals are not required as they are given for being in a certain place at a certain time and that service should be covered in the main body as well. In any case we don't need the images -- if people want to see those they can follow the links to the medal articles.
  • Lastly, and this is an actionable objection if the awards table stays because of incorrect/misleading terminology, everything from 1914-15 Star to Canadian Volunteer Service Medal inclusive is not a decoration but a campaign or service medal. Similarly, the two King George medals are commemoration medals, not decorations.

I'm going to pause for breath there. I emphasise that the above comments are not exhaustive but based on a fairly quick walk-through. I think it would be best to withdraw this and go back to PR or even better seek a FAC mentor as a first-time nominator. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose I agree that it is more important to get the article right than to get it quick, so let us set aside the target date for publication (there is always 8 May 2024) and focus on the best process from here on. For peer review, although there were not a lot of peer review comments through wikipedia, I was able to secure offline reviews by three eminent Canadian naval historians, including one of Murray's biographers and the current official naval historian, and they have confirmed the accuracy of the content. So from here it is, as you suggest, about presentation, tone, style etc. I would be very happy to be coached by a FAC mentor - and as this is a military topic, I would be grateful if you could suggest how I might connect with a mentor who specialises in this domain. I would also be happy to put this up for MilHist A-Class Review. The other items you have signaled in your comments can be dealt with quite easily I feel, like the citations, the overuse of blockquotes, and the medals - but not the prose and tone. I would appreciate your advice on the best way forward (especially obtaining a mentor and WilHist review). Many thanks. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Friendofleonard: - per Ian Rose and Harrias's comments above, I'm going to go ahead and close this. WP:MILHIST/ACR is a good place to get pre-FAC attention for MILHIST articles, although it can be a bit slow at times. If you decide to put it up for ACR, I can try to take a look at this article, although it'll probably be about a week or so because I'm going to be offline this weekend and busy at the beginning of next week. Hog Farm Talk 16:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Leonard_W._Murray/archive2&oldid=1145044238"