Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Joe Hewitt (RAAF officer)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 Karanacs 16:29, 13 September 2009 [1].

Joe Hewitt (RAAF officer) edit

Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk) 13:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

Another Air Marshal, another interesting character... Let this one sit at GA/A-Class for a while but now added new material to round out and clarify what was there, particularly in early career, and hopefully remembered all the MOS updates since it passed those early milestones. For those who reviewed earlier, more anecdotes await such as what he did to miss out on commanding No. 10 Squadron on the eve of World War II, and how a certain section of the Great Barrier Reef came to be named after him... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "…in 1915, at the age of thirteen." I'm not sure about the comma, but you can take out "the" and "of".
    • Thanks for your review/comments. This is done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link secondment.
  • The quote "reservedly pleased about the publicity" should have a reference immediately after it.
    • Take your point but that would result in two consecutive sentences with exactly the same citation, and given recent discussion on 'over-citing' at the FAC talk page there might also be objections to that... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The result was that…" sounds a bit clunky; perhaps "As a result…" or something similar.
  • I think "General Kenney considered Hewitt's removal "bad news"." Should be switched with the sentence preceding it, with the rest of the sentences presenting reaction to Hewitt's removal.
    • I tried the switch but the "As a result..." statement didn't seem to flow that way. Also it's really only Kenney among his contemporaries who had an opinion after the fact - the preceding stuff is more the machinations of the transfer itself, along with modern historians' perspective. Happy to discuss further though, in case I've missed the point. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any information on his burial? Mm40 (talk) 21:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not among my sources, unfortunately. The dedicated entries on him in High Fliers and the Oxford Companion don't go into that level of detail, and he's one of the many odd omissions from the Australian Dictionary of Biography, which invariably does include that sort of thing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment Interesting article, I spent some time checking details against his service record(241 pages one of the longest I've read) available from National Archives of Australia, you'll need to search under his full name[2] NAA searches arent linkable
  • Thanks Gnan, sorry for not replying earlier but there was a lot to go through there, as you know. Funnily enough, I checked for digital personnel records on Hewitt in NAA not that long ago with the express purpose of double-checking dates and seeing if there was anything vital I didn’t already have, and this one never came up, only his separate 5-page RAN record. Apart from that, I'll preface my response by saying that I prefer not to use NAA records unless absolutely necessary, practically because the links are often flaky, and idealistically because I think an encyclopedia ought not rely on primary sources – though admittedly many MilHist bios do use these things (I have myself on occasion) and of course the London Gazette is ubiquitous for citing decorations. On the other hand, I’d always check to ensure that my secondary and tertiary sources aren’t actually contradicted by the file, which is exactly what you’ve done here, so pls see below... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • question 4 May 1925, holding a temporary commission as a Flying Officer; maybe a RAF rank can you clarify, service record pg89 states promotions to;
  • Flight Officer 30.Jan.1923, (honary Flt Lieutenant while on loan from RAN to RAAF 1923 service record pg 233)
  • Flt lieutenant 3.apr.1928,(also the date he transferred to the RAAF)
  • Squarden leader 17.Feb.1931,
  • Wing Commander 1.Jan.1938,
  • Group Captain(temporary) 1.12.1939....
  • I’m not sure that the temporary commission he held in the RAF contradicts anything in his RAAF personnel file and, after all, both the file and the Gazette are primary sources so it could be argued they’re just as accurate as one another. What all this is saying is that he simultaneously held three ranks in three services at once: Lieutenant in the RAN, Flight Lieutenant (temporary) in the RAAF, and Flying Officer (temporary) in the RAF. Frankly I have no problem losing the RAF commission bit if you think it confuses things, as I don’t find it that interesting, but short of that I don’t know that anything would need changing in this article because of it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think a clarifier that your referring to a RAF rank, because thats what I couldnt differentiate Gnangarra 08:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • he was controversially removed from his post in mid-November 1943 service record pg90 states AOC 9OG 15.feb.42 to 17.Dec.43
  • Three sources (Oxford Companion, Stephens in The Royal Australian Air Force and Odgers in the Official History) all say that he was sacked in November. I think it’s reasonable for both dates to be correct, as he would’ve had to remain at his post for a short while before being replaced. Harry Cobby was sacked from command of First Tactical Air Force in April 1945, but didn’t leave until his replacement, Frederick Scherger, arrived in May. To clarify in the article, I can leave the bit about his sacking in mid-November as is, and just add that Lukis took over in December (which we can cite using Lukis’ Australian Dictionary of Biography entry). How does that sound? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • that does sound good because I'd expect someone really interested in Hewitt would ask the same question of why the descrepency of 1 month. Gnangarra 08:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With the exception of the above, the dates in the article correspond to his service record. Gnangarra 14:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tks for your review, mate. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • support which ever way go with these I can now see the why in the wording so I have no issue with supporting this one.Gnangarra 08:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This article is outstanding in every respect and easily meets the FA criteria. Nick-D (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review Copyright status of all the images seems fine. Stifle (talk) 21:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support another great article YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - an excellent and comprehensive article that fully satisfies the criteria. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2009 (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/Joe_Hewitt_(RAAF_officer)/archive1&oldid=1079645486"