Talk:Edwin Foresman Schoch

Review discussion
@CesareBrizio, you should be proud of this article. I conducted a quick search and couldn't find much of anything. I'm impressed you found so many sources! If I were a reviewer, I'd accept this draft. Great job! Dswitz10734 (talk) 20:06, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@Dswitz10734, Thank you very much! I've been researching the subject for a long time and several months ago I finally succeeded to get in touch with Raymond Schoch, the son of Ed Schoch, now 75 years old. After reading his book "An Aviator" (not commercially available - he printed the book on his own funds and distributes it only to his acquaintances), I urged him to prepare a short draft to honor his Father, and he promptly did. I would have gladly conceived the text by myself, but my coarse English would have lowered its quality, and it seemed to me that Ray Schoch was best suited for the task. I failed miserably on first submission - suffice to say that I initially cited only tree references, and the draft was duly rejected! Then, I leveraged my research work on the XF-85 Goblin ("The Goblinarium") to add some additional information. I hope that now, with a wider array of citations, the draft will be accepted... Fingers crossed! By the way, if you are interested in that decade of US Aviation, you may check here: "American Aircraft Fan Club" - the style of my pages is poor to say the least, but this is how I like them and most importantly this is the only way I know to publish on the Web (bare HTML pages!). Again thank you. CesareBrizio (talk) 20:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@ DGG, thank you for having educated me about the importance of the number of unbiased, third-party references. Being at my absolute first submission, I grossly underestimated how many, and which kind of, sources I should have cited. Fortunately, Edwin Foresman Schoch is a legend, the coverage is abundant and I've been researching the subject for several years. I may provide further citations and references, if required. I hope that now my draft complies with the Wikipedia standards. Otherwise, please feel free to provide additional advice. All the best, CesareBrizio (talk) 13:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree it's an interesting career, but I unfortunately do not se how the article meets the relevant standard, WP:MILPERSON. I ses he is already covered in the article on McDonnell XF-85 Goblin, a truly remarkable experimental aircraft. I suggest you redirectto that article, and adjust it so there is a section on him.  DGG ( talk ) 07:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@ DGG, thank you for your advice, but I respectfully disagree. I could not reasonably add to the Wikipedia page about the XF-85 most of the information and of the references - totally unrelated with the McDonnell XF-85 Goblin - that can be found in my draft. Here are some reasons of my respectful dissent:


 * About "Military History Notability Guideline": «It is important to note that a person who does not meet the criteria mentioned above is not necessarily non-notable; ultimately, this determination must be made based on the availability of significant coverage in independent, secondary sources.» There is no doubt that such a coverage is available, suffice to google for "Edwin Schoch" "Test Pilot": the SERP returns more than 200 results.


 * About "General Notability Guideline": «If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list» - of my 28 citations, 19 are unrelated with the XF-85 Goblin and are relative to other feats of Ed Schoch's career as a Navy pilot or as a test pilot.


 * About "Additional Criteria": «The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor» - and Ed Schoch received three significant military honors. Even though his military career alone does not suffice to grant his relevance as a military person, those honors add to his civilian fame as one of the most skilled test pilots ever.


 * About "people notable for only one event": Even though Ed Schoch is particularly well noted for his role as test pilot of one of the weirdest aircraft ever, the XF-85 - he is also reknowned for his military career, and for his role in the testing of other early jets.

For those reasons, I'll take the liberty to resubmit the article hoping that a different reviewer may not share your much welcome and kind opinion. CesareBrizio (talk) 15:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

It should be noted that Wikipedia accepted shorter articles about less referenced test pilots such as the following (but I could cite several more...): while my fully developed draft about a pilot who tested several important planes and deserved three military honors is declined. CesareBrizio (talk) 11:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * J. F. Coleman, dead at 95 years of age - article made of a few lines and just three references cited - no military honors, just one famous plane tested
 * Hubert Broad, dead at 78 years of age - article much shorter than my draft, eight references cited, two honors, very few famous airplanes tested
 * Alvin M. Johnston, died at 84 years of age - article similar to my draft, nine references cited, one honor


 * Saying Schoch should be relegated to a brief mention at XF-85 article would be a disservice, likened to reducing Chuck Yeager to the speed of sound or one of his most-used plane articles. The problem is that Schoch's work was done before Yeager's and this thing called the internet, so verifiable clickable sources aren't available. That doesn’t mean his article shouldn’t be in the mainspace.  Wylie pedia  @ 22:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

@ Wylie - I do agree! Furthermore, it suffices to google for "Ed Schoch" "Test Pilot" to get 429 clickable results. Several among the 28 references that I cited are official sources by U.S. government agencies or by McDonnell Corporation, other are from aviation historians of the highest reputation.CesareBrizio (talk) 13:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@User:Ahunt - I edited the draft as per Your suggestion and every paragraph is referred to the relevant source of information. CesareBrizio (talk) 19:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it is ready for mainspace - moved. - Ahunt (talk) 20:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)