Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Colin Hall Simpson
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.
Another article in the series on Australian generals of World War II. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments: G'day, I made a few tweaks and have the following comments:
- the images seem appropriately licenced (I added US tags where appropriate);
- in the infobox it says his years of service were 1915-1946, but the article states that he joined the Army in 1914;
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- the wikilink for 49th (Prahran) Battalion currently points to the 29th Battalion (Australia), is this right?
- Don't think so. Re-linked to the 14th Infantry Battalion. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- do we know what Simpson did to be mentioned in despatches on 4 January 1917?
- No. There is no recommendation in the War Memorial files, and the mid is part of a very long list of names from Sir Douglas Haig. It's a bit of a mystery to me, because his unit was not in action. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "where he was gassed and wounded for the second time". I might of missed it, but when was he wounded the first time?
- Going to have to look this up. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- inconsistent "I Corps" v "the I Corps";
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "He commanded the 39th Infantry Battalion from 1 July 1929 to 30 June 1933": do we know why he went back to the infantry?
- No, but it was not unusual. The signal corps was small, and there were not too many jobs for a lieutenant colonel. jack Stevens did the same thing. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No worries, that's kind of what I was thinking. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No, but it was not unusual. The signal corps was small, and there were not too many jobs for a lieutenant colonel. jack Stevens did the same thing. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- the infobox mentions his involvement in the Aitape-Wewak and Bougainville campaigns, but these doesn't seem to be mentioned in the prose;
- He is seen at Aitape in the picture on the right. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Added a pic of him on Bougainville. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Works for me. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Added a pic of him on Bougainville. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- He is seen at Aitape in the picture on the right. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- the "Corps Memoranda No 3" link appears to be dead. Is there an archived version that can be linked to? AustralianRupert (talk) 11:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Aaarghh cursed link rot. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for fixing it for me. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No worries. Added my support. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for fixing it for me. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Aaarghh cursed link rot. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments - As I seem to find when reviewing your articles, this is in good order and most of what I have commented on is nitpicking stuff:
- Simpson's postnominals include the VD - this is not mentioned in the main body of the article. Also, according to the wikilink that award was phased out in 1907? I'm not an expert on these so would defer to your experience but I'm wondering if perhaps it should be the ED?
- Nope. Double checked against his Army file. This article is correct; the linked article is wrong. The VD was superseded by the TD in the UK in 1908, but not in Australia, where there was no Territorial Army. The VD continued to be awarded here until it was superseded by the ED in 1930. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm just a bit puzzled because if I have read the article correctly, he joined the Militia in 1914, so his 20 years to qualify for the VD would have come up in 1934, after it was superseded. But if that is what is in his records, that's fine. Zawed (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The period of active service in the Great War counted double. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, got it. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 21:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The period of active service in the Great War counted double. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm just a bit puzzled because if I have read the article correctly, he joined the Militia in 1914, so his 20 years to qualify for the VD would have come up in 1934, after it was superseded. But if that is what is in his records, that's fine. Zawed (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Nope. Double checked against his Army file. This article is correct; the linked article is wrong. The VD was superseded by the TD in the UK in 1908, but not in Australia, where there was no Territorial Army. The VD continued to be awarded here until it was superseded by the ED in 1930. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The citation in the First World War section - this might look better in the quote template.
- It already is. Something to do with the pic. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- In the South West Pacific section, I think the first sentence would read better if it was made more explicit that I Corps was being transferred to the SWP.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It might be my system, but the first image in the SWP section is just showing a linked caption? All the others are fine.
- Could be your system. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Damn my system. Zawed (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Could be your system. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Simpson, who was on an inspection tour of New Guinea, was on hand for the first message." Perhaps that should be "Simpson, who was on an inspection tour of New Guinea, was on hand for receipt of the first message sent to Port Moresby.?
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "The large numbers of women in Signals..." Should that be something like "The large numbers of women serving in signal units..."
- Done. Even today there are large numbers of women in Sigs. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Zawed (talk) 07:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- All good, have added my support. Zawed (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support
- No dab links [1] (no action required).
- External links check out [2] (no action required).
- A couple of images lack Alt Text [3] so you might consider adding it for consistency (suggestion only - not an ACR requirement).
- The Citation Check Tool reveals no issues with reference consolidation (no action required).
- Images are all PD and are appropriate to the article (no action required).
- The Earwig Tool reveals no issues with copyright violations [4] (no action required).
- Duplicate links ok.
- I reviewed for GA and have re-read the article again and believe it also meets the A class criteria. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 13:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries. - Dank (push to talk)
- "Australian Signal Corps", "Australian Corps of Signals": are both right?
- Yes. Officiallly, the corps is the "Australian Corps of Signals" but everyone calls it the "Signal Corps" or just "sigs". I've standarised on "Australian Corps of Signals", although this sounds cumbersome at times. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay ... another option would be to lowercase "signal corps" when you don't want to use the proper name. - Dank (push to talk) 20:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. Officiallly, the corps is the "Australian Corps of Signals" but everyone calls it the "Signal Corps" or just "sigs". I've standarised on "Australian Corps of Signals", although this sounds cumbersome at times. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- So far so good on prose per standard disclaimer, down to where I stopped, about two-thirds of the way, at Colin_Hall_Simpson#South West Pacific. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 19:02, 15 January 2013 (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.