Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/James P. Hagerstrom/archive1

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 promoted by Ealdgyth via FACBot (talk) 14 June 2020 [1].

James P. Hagerstrom edit

Nominator(s): ~hue sat lum/ 18:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a U.S. Air Force fighter pilot who was a flying ace in both World War II and the Korean War. It passed a thorough MILHIST A-Class Review in 2018, and I believe it has only improved since then and meets the FA criteria. As this is my first FAC nom, Nick-D was gracious enough to mentor me through the process, and I hope to get the article to FA in time for it to run on TFA next January for the 100th anniversary of his birth. Enjoy! ~hue sat lum/ 18:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support I posted a detailed informal review on the article's talk page at Talk:James P. Hagerstrom#Informal review last year. I've just read through the article again, and am confident that it meets the FA criteria. Nick-D (talk) 07:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you again for your assistance and your support. ~hue sat lum/ 15:33, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Ian edit

Recusing coord duties, I reviewed and supported at the article's MilHist A-Class Review and have checked changes since then, copyediting as I went.
I don't see anything about the circumstances of his being awarded the Silver Star, LoM, DFC and Air Medal... Not expecting full citations as for the DSC, but would've like to see brief statements during the narrative of when and why he received them. Incidentally, according to Sherwood (2000) p.4, the Silver Star was with five oak clusters.
- I added context for those awards. Regarding the Silver Star with five clusters, it seems Sherwood got that fact wrong, as I found several sources (Oliver & Lorenz 1999, p. 80; Inouye 1994; Hall of Valor) that only mention one Silver Star, and no others that say six. ~hue sat lum/ 17:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Given this is the nominator's first FAC, I've spotchecked some sources for accurate use and avoidance of close paraphrasing:
- FN5: our article mentions “(which used coveralls and civilian uniforms due to the lack of standard uniforms)”; the source says “coveralls and a civilian suit” – I’d suggest that “civilian suit” sounds more like a business suit than any kind of uniform but in any case I don’t think we really need this level of detail and could safely lose the whole bit that’s in parentheses.
  - Changed uniforms to suits. I'm inclined to keep the parenthetical because I think it shows the lack of resources the recruits dealt with, but I'm not attached to it. ~hue sat lum/ 17:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- FN18: okay although I tweaked wording slightly.
- FN45: mostly fine but don’t think the source clearly states it was the Chinese pilot’s own base, rather “the enemy airfield which was directly below the action”.
  - I added another cite that mentions it was his own base. ~hue sat lum/ 17:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- FN48: okay.
- FN53: okay.
- FN59: okay.
I performed a source review for reliability and formatting at the MilHist ACR and on a fairly quick glance things still look okay in that respect but I'll try and make another pass at that later to confirm.

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:39, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've reviewed changes since I last looked and just tweaked a couple of things so happy to support. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Wehwalt edit

Seems very well written. Just a few comments.
Are military history articles supposed to be day month year or month day year as this one is?

If I'm reading it correctly, WP:MILDATE does seem to say that DMY should be used for military articles, but either way it says "Existing articles related to military history should follow MOS:DATERET as a default". ~hue sat lum/ 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The material he took to Korea. Were all these taken in the plane?

Yes. I clarified this in the article. ~hue sat lum/ 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Were there any repercussions from his continuing the chase into Chinese airspace on the 2/25/53 kill?

The sources don't specify, unfortunately. ~hue sat lum/ 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to start a fundraiser for Risner's bail," Bail? Were POWs available for release with cash?

I'm not sure, but that's what the source says. Perhaps that's why the effort was shut down. ~hue sat lum/ 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"of the Federated States of Micronesia," Well, as you mention Saigon by its former name, this should probably be the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands since that is what it was then.

Done. ~hue sat lum/ 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:57, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comments and your support. ~hue sat lum/ 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:COMMAND_PILOT_WINGS.png: source link is dead. Same with File:Presidential_Unit_Citation_(South_Korea).svg
File:United_Nations_Service_Medal_Korea_ribbon.svg: don't follow the tagging here - is this a US government work or is it not? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review. I've replaced the two dead source links. Regarding United_Nations_Service_Medal_Korea_ribbon, it looks the uploader released their SVG file under CC-BY, and the file is a derivative work of the ribbon itself, which is PD. I'm no expert, so perhaps this is incorrect or invalid. ~huesatlum/ 03:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - The current tagging suggests the ribbon is a US federal government work, but based on United Nations Korea Medal it's not clear to me why that would be. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think you're right, it seems it was created by the United Nations, not the US. Do you think commons:Template:PD-US-no notice-UN would be more appropriate then? ~huesatlum/ 23:01, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - Possibly, although it's not really a "document". Given the dates the copyright-expired tag should be sufficient for US status. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        Makes sense, I've done that. ~hue sat lum/ 03:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by PM edit

Interesting read. Well done on this so far. I have some comments:

Lead and infobox

the infobox caption should read "Hagerstrom with an F-86 Sabre in Korea, c. 1952" as it is unlikely he flew the one aircraft in Korea
I would drop the Air Medal from the infobox as it is a common award
suggest "and was posted to fight in the"→participated in the"
suggest "There, he mainly escorted bombers flying P-40 Warhawks with the 8th Fighter Squadron" and link, as it is unlikely he flew the same aircraft on every mission, and given he flew with the single squadron, mentioning it in the lead is appropriate
suggest "He later transferred to the USAF and flew F-86 Sabre fighter jets with the 18th Fighter-Bomber Wing in "MiG Alley", the nickname given to the area around the northern border of North Korea with China." then "During his service in Korea he shot down 8.5 Chinese, Soviet, and North Korean MiG-15s."
the "30 combat missions" in Vietnam begs the question of what sort of aircraft and missions he flew.
- The source does not specify, unfortunately. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Body

James Hagerstrom→James Philo Hagerstrom as his full name is in the lead and needs citation in the body
- Done. It is supported by the existing cite. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The family lived in ~~a small wooden house in~~ Waterloo, Iowa"
were Iowa State Teachers College and Iowa State University different institutions at the time?
- Yes. The Teachers College is now University of Northern Iowa. However, I re-read the source and it is unclear where he did flight training, so I reflected that in the article. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"which ~~used~~wore coveralls"
"in basic flight training at the same time"
"was commissioned as a second lieutenant"
the caption should read "Hagerstrom flew the P-40 Warhawk in World War II."
delete "Hagerstrom was temporarily given the duty of quarters officer, and he arranged for the group of forty second lieutenants to stay at the Mark Hopkins Hotel.", it really isn't encyclopaedic information
- I'd argue that it is encyclopedic, as the Mark Hopkins is a well-known luxury hotel and it seems unusual for a bunch of soldiers to stay there. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Port Moresby, Territory of Papua" and link
Dobodura Airfield isn't near Moresby, it is about 140 klicks over the Owen Stanleys. Suggest "to Dobodura Airfield near Popondetta" and link the latter
say the P-38 Lightning was also a fighter
Hagerstrom was ~~given~~awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross
"Tsili Tsili Airfield in the Territory of New Guinea" and link the latter
"after two raids on August 15 and 16 that did little damage"
"due to another enemy reconnaissance plane in the area"
"the co-located P-38s to take off"
"was sent to Australia for three weeks to recover."
"P-38 Lightnings to escort bombers"
the Ki-61 Tony is referred to as a Ki-61 Hien in the Victories table
- Changed Tony to Hien. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"He requested ~~to be in~~an assignment to a unit that flew jet aircraft"
in P-47 Thunderbolts→flying P-47 Thunderbolts
"The couple were reunited"
what aircraft did the 111th Fighter-Bomber Squadron fly?
- P-51. I've specified. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"special mirrored sunglasses that allowed him to see twice as far as normal" seems an extraordinary claim. Is there any explanation as to how sunglasses would permit him to see further? Surely binoculars would be required?
- I clarified that they let him see twice as clearly, not twice as far. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
the caption should read "Hagerstrom flew the F-86 Sabre in the Korean War."
"propeller-driven F-51 Mustangs to ~~jet~~ F-86s", as they were redesignated F-51 by this stage, as you have noted above, and we already know the F-86 was a jet
"on February 25 he was part of the 18th FBW's first patrol in Sabre jets" but hadn't he been flying F-86s with 18th FBW?
- Hagerstrom had been flying F-86s, but the entire 18th FBW didn't start using them until February. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and ~~would be~~was the only one from the 18th FBW"
link Chongchon River
- It's already linked a few paragraphs above. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Tachikawa Airfield in Japan"
delete "Hagerstrom volunteered for extra flights on his days off, once flying under a pseudonym." as these things have already been relayed with reference to particular incidents
"U.S. pilots were not allowed to attack planes on the ground" in China? Surely they were allowed to do so in North Korea?
- After re-reading the source, it was China only. Fixed. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and ~~headed~~commanded the 450th Fighter-Day Squadron" if that is right?
"he advocated for retaining guns on fighter jets instead of replacing them with missiles" but weren't guns retained as well as missiles? This seems counter-factual.
- Edited to reflect that this only referred to some aircraft. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
link Office of Inspector General (United States)
what aircraft did the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing fly?
- F-4s, added. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
same question about what sort of combat missions he flew in Vietnam and in what types of aircraft
- Same as above, the source does not specify. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The ambush of the VC" it doesn't seem to have been an ambush, more an air strike
- Changed to airstrike. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"using this to argue that air attacks cause fewer casualties than a war of attrition strategy with ground forces" I don't follow this at all, why would he promote the idea of causing fewer casualties on the enemy?
- Clarified friendly casualties. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
full stop after Shreveport
I think the list of the other dual aces is unnecessary, in any case William T. Whisner Jr. is duplinked. You could create a navigation template at the bottom of the article instead
- I don't think a navbox would be appropriate, as there is no main topic article and they are connected just by a bit of trivia. Perhaps a footnote? ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
for consistency, I suggest adding the nickname for the Ki-46 to the table
- I think that would be inconsistent, as Zero and Hien are part of the names for those aircraft, whereas "Dinah" is just a nickname used by the Allies for the Ki-46. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
in the DSC citation "he caused it to burst into flames"

Sources

I have queries about the reliability of Hall of Valor and the need for using the Social Security Death Index (it is redundant, as Oliver & Lorenz 1999 has all the cited info)
- From the About page, Hall of Valor is curated by a Military Times editor, and they seem to have a solid verification process. Regarding the Death Index, I'd rather keep the birth date double-cited because one source incorrectly lists his birth date. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's me done. Nothing too drastic, mainly tweaks throughout to improve the grammar and enhance clarity. A couple of queries about claims/statements made. Well done so far. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed review. I believe I have responded to everything; if I didn't explicitly reply to a point, that means I accepted your suggestion. ~hue sat lum/ 20:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Nice work, supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:59, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild edit

Nb: I intend to claim points in the WikiCup for this review.

This was the 10th article I ever copy edited for GoCE, back in my first month of being active on Wikipedia. It seems to have coped with the experience remarkably well. A few random comments.

Oliver and Lorenz; Werrell: both need page ranges.
- Which ref are you referring to? All footnotes I see have page ranges. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In James P. Hagerstrom#Sources#Books these two citations need the page ranges of their chapters.

I added the page range for Werrell and removed the chapter specification for O&L, as there is a footnote from outside the chapter. ~hue sat lum/ 16:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sherwood needs a publisher location. (Yes, I know it's obvious.)
- I think the location is unnecessary when it's part of the publisher name. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Publishers with a place name in their name frequently publish from another location. In any case it is usual to be consistent with regard to either giving all book publisher locations or none.

Done. ~hue sat lum/ 16:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"he shot down 8.5 Chinese, Soviet, and North Korean MiG-15s" I am unconvinced that it is possible to shoot down 0.5 of an aircraft. This is phrased better in the main text.
- I added a brief clarification. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly 'he was credited with the shooting down of 8.5 Chinese, Soviet, and North Korean MiG-15s (the half coming from a shared credit)' would make the flow a little easier for a reader.

Changed to "he was credited with shooting down..." ~hue sat lum/ 16:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Hagerstrom joined the rest of the 8th FS at Kila Airfield" Is it known when?
- The source does not specify. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The 8th FS switched to escorting B-25 Mitchell and A-20 Havoc bombers but saw little action themselves. They saw more combat ..." Should the 8th FS not be 'It', not ""They"?
- I think you're right, but it sounds strange to me, so I reworded it to avoid that. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know the feeling - have have done similar rewordings myself.

"most of the Japanese pilots in the sky" 1, "in the sky" seems a little informal, 2. does it add anything to the article?
- Removed. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"he was instead made an instructor" Is it known when?
- No, the source doesn't specify. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"he was instructed ... in gunnery of the ... F-80 Shooting Star and F-86 Sabre" This reads a little oddly. What does it mean?
- I've reworded the sentence. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly "took" → 'undertook'?

Changed. ~hue sat lum/ 16:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"He got a pair of moccasin boots lined with felt, a silk-lined flight suit for winter insulation" → 'He got a pair of moccasin boots lined with felt and a silk-lined flight suit for winter insulation'.
- Any particular reason for this change? This is a three-item list, so usually only the last pair gets an "and". ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. But it reads as if both the boots and the suit are "for winter insulation", which caused me to stumble over the grammar.

Reworded to clarify that both were for insulation. ~hue sat lum/ 16:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to see with twice the visual acuity as normal" Is this acceptable AmericanEnglish? In British English it would be 'to see with twice the visual acuity of normal'.
- I'm not sure, but either way it's an awkward construction, so I reworded it. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"(including 10 pounds [4.5 kg] of rice) The MoS suggests that "[4.5 kg]" should be '(4.5 kg)'.
- Since the parenthetical is within another set of parentheses, I believe using square brackets is correct. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your copy edits then and your comments now. I have responded to them. ~hue sat lum/ 02:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of comments on your responses above. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:04, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A fine piece of work and well up to the FA criteria. Happy to support. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.