Talk:RAF Benson/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 15:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are more than a few duplicate links that need to be gotten rid of (one each only) Done
Images appropriately licensed
Explain or link what a Main Operating Base is Done – replaced with 'front-line'
What's a support helicopter, an operational conversion unit, training station and a lodger unit? – Done explained or removed
What kind of aircraft is a Grob? Done – explanation provided
in the photographic reconnaissance role This really isn't quite right. It housed a PR wing, but didn't actually fly any missions. Same for began its current support helicopter role Done
Link signals unit, No. 6 Group, observer, air gunner Done
Generally use a full stop/period for people's initials Done
The station's first aircraft This reads awkwardly to me. I'd suggest "tenant" instead of aircraft Done
joined in the ~~next~~ over Done
Why should a reader care about the locations of Boscombe Down and Abingdon? Done – those and other examples removed

More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look. Points above hopefully addressed Thx811 (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discrepancy in opening date. The current RAF webpage says "On 1 February 1939, RAF Benson opened and accepted its first aircraft; 2 squadrons of Fairey Battle Bombers." Our references state April. Important to note here that one of these references is also from the RAF website (archived). I think the discrepancy is February will have been the opening date and April the official or ceremonial opening date? But I think it's important to bottom this out (and perhaps note in footnotes). If someone has access to Marriott (1997) a quotation might be helpful in clearing this up. Mark83 (talk) 07:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Marriot says on p.128 It opened for business as a No 6 Group light bomber station in April 1939 when two squadrons of Fairey Battles (No 150 followed by No 103) moved in.... I've read histories of other stations where squadrons arrive prior to the official opening date so I suspect what you are saying is correct. How do you think we should treat this? Are there any other pages that have had similar issues?

What about keeping it as is and adding an explanatory note? Something along the lines of "there are some discrepancies amongst sources regarding the opening date of RAF Benson"? I've tried and failed to get a clear picture:

This one just muddies the water further: "Group Captain Ralph Leather arrived on January 18, 1939, and officially opened the station on February 1 under No 1 Group Bomber Command. The base was home to No 1 Photographic Reconnaissance Unit throughout the Second World War. The new airfield welcomed its first aircraft when two squadrons of Fairey Battle Bombers moved in on April 3, 1939." (January 31, 2014). RAF Benson celebrates 75 years. Oxford Mail.
"Construction work began on RAF Benson in 1937, and the first aircraft to arrive were two squadrons of Fairey Battle light bombers on April 3, 1939." Andrew Ffrench. (May 7, 2009 Thursday). Update: RAF Benson's future secured. Oxford Mail.
"RAF Benson was officially opened on Saturday 1st April 1939" [1]
1st April 1939 *Google Books result
(Mentioned above) "On 1 February 1939, RAF Benson opened and accepted its first aircraft; 2 squadrons of Fairey Battle Bombers." Official RAF page.
"[On 1 February] in 1939, RAF Benson officially opened. A lot has happened in those 81 years but the spirit of #TeamBenson remains unchanged." RAF Benson Twitter account

I've added an explanatory note now and changed the text to say the station opened in early 1939. Hopefully covers it but feel free to tweak, Thx811 (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This should be a Good Article. I've made some tweaks myself. A few other queries:

"The unit was the first to discover the Germany Navy battleship Bismarck, near Bergen in May 1941" -- The relevance of this isn't explained, nor is it mentioned at German battleship Bismarck. I assume this was the beginning of the end, i.e. Operation Rheinübung which saw the ship sail for the North Atlantic and ultimately sunk. But this context is required.

Done expanded.

Not a deal-breaker, as it's pedantic. But was the truncated road the London Road which became the Old London Road because it was replaced? Or was it the Old London Road when the RAF station caused its truncation? (But only if someone knows, please don't waste time researching)

Did a very quick check on an old map ([2]) but the road isn't named just numbered.

"The units offer basic flying training and adventure training to University undergraduates and graduates" -- adventure training? Forgive my ignorance on this, it just doesn't sound like the main purpose of the units?

Done Agreed, adventure training would be a minor part of the units role so have removed.

"RAF Benson's mission statement is to "Deliver support helicopter operational capability"." is not covered by the reference

Done removed as current official site doesn't mention if there is a mission statement any longer.

The timeline of Royal squadron(s) isn't clear:
- "Benson's long association with royalty began in September 1940, when the King's Flight relocated to the station.[6] This initial association was short-lived, as the flight was disbanded in 1942 to form the core of No. 161 Squadron at RAF Newmarket, to which responsibility for the transportation of royalty was transferred."
- Next is:
- "With the departure of the Argosys, the only flying unit which remained at Benson was the Queen's Flight."
- 2 points here. Will all readers be aware of the fact that the King's Flight became the Queen's Flight due to the change of the monarch? I know this seems obvious, but that's not necessarily true. Especially to non-UK readers? Secondly according to the article the Flight moved to Newmarket, but the return to Benson is not mentioned/explained.

Done Text added explaining that flight reformed at Benson in 1946 and was later renamed.

Mark83 (talk) 08:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for assisting, comments in response above Thx811 (talk) 20:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

both ~~No. 103 and No. 150~~ Squadrons moved to France You provided the numbers of the squadrons in the previous sentence. Readers haven't had time to forget them. Done
Aside from Shuttleworth, what's memorable about these two crashes? I'm sure there were others, why are they not covered as well?

Done Removed the second crash and retained the first as its of note.

What were the squadrons that flew the Mosquitoes and Canberras? And when did they leave?

Done Content now added covering this

Isn't there are a full stop in the designations of the Chipmunk and Bulldog? Done
The MCSU had apparently been stationed at Benson earlier according to the official website.

Done Updated

What, pray tell, is the Puma Depth Support Hub?

Done The Puma maintenance unit, however I've removed as current official website doesn't mention it any longer.

Jeffords' book on RAF Squadrons is the best reference that I know of for tracking squadron movements through '98. Why hasn't it been consulted?

--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Can't speak for other editors but I haven't consulted it as I don't have a copy

I'd suggest that you get a copy via a library if nothing else, if you want to do more of these types of articles. I thought that you did a good job with this one, but it could only have been helped by using Jefford.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Almost forgot. Captions are not considered to be full sentences and should not end in a full stop unless they're two or more sentences long. Done

--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

responded Thx811 (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's good that you're adding alt text, but it need to describe what's going on in the photo and not simply duplicate the caption. The alt text will be read aloud by screen readers for the visually impaired and be pretty concise. Something like a red and white aircraft on a plinth, etc.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the primary reviewer, but I wish to register my support for passing this article's nomination. Mark83 (talk) 10:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both, noted on the alt text Thx811 (talk) 21:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]