Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Heinrich Bär


 * 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 SandyGeorgia 01:08, 4 March 2009.

Heinrich Bär

 *  Nominator(s): MisterBee1966 

I am nominating this article for featured article because it easily passed the A-class review and I feel that FAC is possible too. MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. I double checked the books, and some of them are from some obscure publishing companies that appear to specialize in military history, and do not appear to be self-publishing companies. I also double checked what WorldCat libraries had the works, to double check. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Sandy Georgia (Talk) 00:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Image concerns: no issue with File:Bundesarchiv Bild 101I-666-6875-05, Abgeschossenes amerikanisches Flugzeug B 17.jpg; however, where did File:Lwbar.jpg come from? What proof is there that this image was published before 1923 or qualifies for PD? Please refer to Public domain. Jappalang (talk) 13:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Lwbar.jpg was replaced with File:Heinrich Bär (Luftwaffe flying ace, born 1913).jpg, no issue with the fair-use portrait in this article. Jappalang (talk) 16:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Query Hi Mister Bee, interesting work. My understanding of the military is they have a tendency to defined hierarchies so looking at "On 11 May, Bär was transferred from IV./JG 51 on the Moscow front to take command of I./Jagdgeschwader 77 (JG 77), commanded by Gordon Gollob," its unlikely that both commanded the JG 77 at the same time, was JG 77 part of something larger that Gollob commanded? Also my understanding of WWII Luftwaffe stats is that they claimed to have shot down rather more aircraft than the RAF actually had. Do we trust those figures?  Were Spiel  Chequers  10:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also is Fatnassa the one in Tunisia? http://www.geonames.org/2473013/ouled-fatnassa.html  Were Spiel  Chequers  11:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Answer I assume that I'm not precise enough in my wording. Bär was tasked to command I./JG 77, meaning he commanded the 1st Gruppe (group) of JG 77. Gordon Gollob on the other hand commanded all of JG 77. So Gollob was Bär's commanding officer at that time. At least that is what I intend to say. MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks that now makes sense to me.  Were Spiel  Chequers  23:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Regarding overclaiming of aerial victories; this topic is subject to debate and leads to frustration over many Wikipedia based articles dealing with aerial warfare. You ask whether they can be trusted? A number of editors here on Wikipedia have tried to address this problem here: Confirmation and overclaiming of aerial victories. My contribution to this article is based on the references I listed and you can verify that I own most of them here User:MisterBee1966/Library. The figures in this article here are based on my sources. I am inclined to believe that they are as trustworthy as possible under the circumstances of World War II aerial warfare. Does that make them 100% error free? Probably not! MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I've added that to one of your footnotes.  Were Spiel  Chequers  00:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is Fatnassa in Tunisia. MisterBee1966 (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, would you mind doublechecking the sequence in the Mediterranean section? Currently we have "operated from Fatnassa, Tunisia in early March 1943  - - In June, JG 77 was moved to the Mediterranean area and took part in the air battles over Malta before relocating to Italy. - In Tunisia," So Tunisia, Mediterranean, Italy Tunisia.  Were  Spiel  Chequers  23:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done reworded this slighlty MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi MisterBee, I'm still uncomfortable with this timing, and it looks to me very different to what we are saying in Jagdgeschwader 77. In particular we have the first Galland meeting taking place twice, once on the eastern front and once in the Mediterranean.  Were Spiel  Chequers  12:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I rechecked my sources: first, Bergström & Mikhailov state that Galland visited I./JG 77 at the Russian front on the day that Bär achieved his 100th vistory. Second, I also checked Kurowski, here it states that Müncheberg introduced Bär to Galland on 1 March 1943. There is no mentioning in the article as well as in my sources to which encounter was the first. MisterBee1966 (talk) 20:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The article here is not about JG 77 but Bär. I./JG 77 operated from 32 different airfields during Bär's command of the I. Gruppe (11 May 1942 – 31 July 1943). During this timeframe the unit was stationed on the Eastern front until June 1942. Then they moved to North Africa (July 1942 – May 1943) via Sicily. The operations against Malta were flown out of Sicily as far as I know. Next physical relocation was to Sicily in early May 1943 before moving to airbases in Bari, Italy in late May 1943. I don't feel that I need to go into this level of detail when writing an article about Bär. I moved the paragraphs to have the chronology inline. The article about JG 77 currently is unsourced. I don't see why more trust is placed on that article? MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, That latest change to June 1942 fixes the sequence. Previously the sequence of March 1943 followed by June in the next paragraph implied to me you meant June 1943. 10:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)  Were Spiel  Chequers  10:46, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi MisterBee, Apart from one parent presumably his mother being a farmer, there is no information about his family and very little about his personal life. If the sources don't cover that then fair enough but ideally a bio should - see Edmund Herring for a good example. Do you have anything about siblings, lovers, children etc?  Were Spiel  Chequers  13:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I don't have further insight into his private life. The most detailed book I own about his life is by Kurowski who says very, very little about his early life. There is some mentioning of him enjoying playing pranks with his neighbours. MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK well what we don't have we don't have, the important thing for the FAC is that we've considered that and gone as far as the sources cover.  Were Spiel  Chequers  16:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Image I uploaded a new version of the same picture File:Heinrich Bär (Luftwaffe flying ace, born 1913).jpg. Could someone knowledgeable please check if the Non-free fair use rational I gave is legitimate? MisterBee1966 (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A little bit of editing made this okay. Jappalang (talk) 16:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments - I come to this FAC after a request on this page, and after I did some copy-editing. Here are the two big issues I see with the prose in the lead, and another one I caught while in the process of typing this: Overall the article looks very interesting, and I look forward to giving it some further work in the near-future.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 03:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "He is credited with 220 victories, claimed fighting in all the major German theaters of the war...". The "claimed" part is very awkward if this is read in its entirety.
 * "an achievement which is believed should have earned him the coveted...". Again some awkwardness, this time with "which is believed".
 * World War II: On a quick glance, I see that the "England is no longer an island!" quote needs a citation. done

Comments Hi and thanks for all the constructive feedback. Unfortunately English is not my native language so please stay with me.

"He was credited with 220 aerial victories, claimed fighting in all the major German theaters of the war including the Western Front, Mediterranean and Eastern front."

What I intend to convey is the following: 1st, he is credited with 220 victories. 2nd he fought in all the major theaters. 3rd, the word claim is a tribute to the fact that aerial kills, especially by Germans, are always subject to debate. If this can be expressed more elegantly please let me know. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've tried to rephrase that slightly, sequencing it as per his story - east then med and swapped missions with kills so that kills is juxtaposed with being shotdown and missions with campaigns. What do you both think? Also to Giants, imprecision of WWII kill stats is covered in a footnote, do you think that sufficient, and if not what do you suggest? And MrBee, Re "an achievement which is believed should have earned him the coveted." would "an achievement which would normally have earned the coveted." be true?  Were Spiel  Chequers  15:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, that reflects the message I intended to bring across. Personally I find the disclaimer about aerial victories sufficiently covered in the footnote. However, I know that a number of editors may want to change "and he was credited with 220 aerial victories" to something like "and claimed 220 aerial victories", which to my understanding does not fully reflect the facts. A claim is submitted by the pilot. Only after evidence and eye witnesses are presented, does a claim become a credited victory. So the mixture of "credited victory" and "claim" is a tribute to those people that question the approval procedure. MisterBee1966 (talk) 17:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK I'm happy that its credited not claimed - yes there are anomalies in the crediting process but thats one reason for saying he was credited with shooting down rather than he shot down. I'm intrigued at the figure for him being shot down, especially as we also refer to some crashlandings. My understanding is that shot down means you've had to bail out whilst a plane that limps home and crashlands may be a write off but isn't shotdown. That may be me showing ignorance of air combat, but if not do we need to rephrase this as he was shotdown x times and nursed y writeoffs back to crashlandings.  Were Spiel  Chequers  11:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Support I think the article is up to FA standards, there are some gaps that we would normally cover in a biography, but if we don't have sources we can't cover them and they don't detract from the things that make him notable and this article an interesting read.  Were Spiel  Chequers  11:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Comment - WP:CITE advises that the citation style used in the article be consistent; with that in mind, the non-footnoted reference in the lead should be converted to a footnote. I'll try to review the article soon, but make no promises. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

The first one wasn't there when I copy-edited this, and I wasn't sure about the others before. On a second glance, however, I think changes would be beneficial. Overall it's a fine article, and I plan on supporting when these are done.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 22:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments - Few more things I found that I want to have looked at before I support:
 * Lead: "an achievement which which would normally have earned...". done
 * World War II: "Incidents like this are testimony to his often blatant disregard for higher authority;" Make the semi-colon a comma. done
 * Eastern front: Comma after "JG 51 was credited with 113 kills in total". done
 * Defense of the Reich: The link can be removed from Major here, since there's one in the previous section. done
 * Summary of career: "His claim of 124 aerial victories over Western-flown aircraft is second only to Hans-Joachim Marseille's total of 158;" Again, make the semi-colon a comma. done
 * All issues addressed! Thanks for the feedback MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In that case, I'll support now. I find this to be a great article overall (disclaimer: I copy-edited it during this FAC). Wish there was a little more about his personal life in the sources, but I don't feel that should be held against the article here.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 20:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Dabs look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Sarcasticidealist (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments: There's a lot to like here, and I think I may be able to support before this is through. However, there are a couple of statements that I think need to be referenced, and the prose isn't yet of FA quality.
 * "Presumably, Hermann Göring himself witnessed this aerial battle." Why do we presume this? done footnote added
 * Good, but the footnote, if anything, explains why we *shouldn't* presume that he witnessed it. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "Your speech, Herr Reichsmarschall that England is no longer an island!" If this quotation is taken directly from a source, it needs a [sic] .  If it isn't, it needs a comma.  As well, is there additional context that could be applied here?  As I read it, Bar was poking fun at Goering for claiming that England was no longer an island, citing the presence of water all around it as refutation, but I'm not clear on why Goering said that England was no longer an island. done [sic] added. I can only allude to the intensions of Göring. I think he intended to bolster moral and indicate that defeating England is just a question of time.
 * Do the sources explain to whom he gave the speech, and in what circumstances? That might be helpful.
 * done I think this addresses the issue MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * " Incidents like this are testimony to his often blatant disregard for higher authority, a trait that would frequently land the young ace in trouble." This probably needs a source. done
 * "Led by such able Experten..." What able Experten? For that matter, what are Experten? done
 * The first question still isn't answered. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * done rephrased the sentence


 * "...JG 77 "took over" the air space..." Why the quotes? done removed
 * "With Gollob a disciplinarian pro-Nazi and Bär an anti-authoritarian, there was mutual animosity between the two aces and an intense rivalry ensued." Probably needs a source. done
 * "His combat skills were hard to overlook and hence Bär was transferred to II./Jagdgeschwader 1 (JG 1) on 21 January 1941 as an ordinary pilot." We seem to be moving back in time here - what's going on? done good spot, was 1944
 * "Morale of the group soared following his appointment. He was considered the unofficial leader of the group and the best officer in the entire Geschwader. This effectively completed his formal rehabilitation from the prior year's demotion." All of this should be sourced. done
 * "Further pressure from the appearing Generalmajor Dietrich Peltz, commander of IX. Fliegerkorps, and from Oberst Hajo Herrmann, commander of 9. Fliegerdivision, unexpectedly emerged at the control room in Maxglan on 2 May 1945." This sentence makes no sense. done hope this makes it clear
 * I'm not sure I see the reason for the "Summary of career" section. It seems to be largely restating information that's already found in the body of the article.  Could it be pruned down?
 * Footnote A doesn't seem to relate to the sentence it's been placed after. done relates to number of victories
 * As a general comment, I think there's too much German in the article. I appreciate that some of it is necessary, and the numerous wikilinks are undoubtedly helpful, but I think some changes could be made: for example, "Hauptmann" apparently means "Captain"; is there a style guideline somewhere that says that military ranks have to be in the original language?  If not, could these be translated into English?  The article is quite difficult to read - to an extent, this is inevitable but, bearing in mind that we are writing for a general audience of English speakers, I think there's room for improvement. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your constructive feedback. I think I addressed the majority of your comments. I translated the German ranks and used the English terms were appropriate. Unfortunately I can’t find an appropriate term in every instance. With respect of summary of career I would like some feedback what you want to omit? I would prefer to leave it as is. MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The use of German has definitely improved. With regards to summary of career, much of the information—the three Wehrmachtbericht mentions, most of the awards, most of the promotions—are already covered in the text, and repeating them here doesn't serve much purpose.  As well, looking more carefully, I've found some contradictions between the two: in "Dates of rank", it says that he was promoted to Captain in September/October 1941, while in the text it says that this occurred in "early 1942". Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Good spot again. Nevertheless I'm sticking with the summary of career section. If this is the only thing from making this article fail at FAC so be it. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Inclined to agree with Sarcasticidealist that more work could be done on the prose. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Ref comments -- Errors found using WP:REFTOOLS.
 * Caldwell & Muller 2007, p. 153.	Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
 * Donaldcaldwell07	Multiple references are given the same name -- TRU  CO   03:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * done MisterBee1966 (talk) 05:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Reference formatting found up to speed.-- TRU  CO   22:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Support - I reviewed this article for GA, and see that MisterBee has further developed the article since then. This article is well written, nicely structured, comprehensive and meets the FA criteria. Well done! Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments It's pretty good, but needs some fit and finish before it's ready. Examples:
 * "... and he was credited with 220 aerial victories." How will readers know what constitutes a "victory"? Not dying? Making the other person die? done
 * I'm not sure why his accent is important enough to be mentioned in the lead, or indeed at all. (Okay, I see now that it has to do with Göring hating him, but it still doesn't need to be in the lead.) question His Saxon accent is so important to his character and is mentioned so frequently, at least in German literature, that I would find it a major omission not to mention it in the lead of the article. MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:02, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Bär was born to a farmer in Sommerfeld ..." A female farmer, I hope, or we have some explaining to do. done some more background added MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "After he illegally conducted some aerobatics on the Ju 86, he was secretly trained on fighter aircraft by Squadron Leader (Staffelkapitän) Douglas Pitcairn before officially becoming a fighter pilot." This is a pretty big logical jump... much more information is needed. done I wish I had more MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Stationed on the border with France, Bär achieved his first victory—a Curtiss P-36 'Hawk ..." Again, unclear what "victory" means in this context. done should be clear now with the reader having read the lead MisterBee1966 (talk) 05:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "During the Battle of France, he scored two more victories ..." "Scored" is too colloquial. done
 * "Incidents like this are testimony to his often blatant disregard for higher authority ..." I only see one incident. It's not clear that he had a disregard for authority, as opposed to a dislike for Göring.
 * "On this day JG 51 was credited with 113 kills in total ..." Is a kill different from a victory? done
 * "With Gollob a disciplinarian pro-Nazi and Bär an anti-authoritarian ..." This sentence needs revision so it doesn't begin with the ugly "With a " clause. done
 * "On 19 May 1942, Bär made five further aerial claims ..." Is a claim a kill or a victory? done
 * "In June 1942, JG 77 was moved to the Mediterranean area ..." The link to "Mediterranean" redirects to the Sea.. is that where they were? Over the sea? Can we be more specific? done
 * Normally, "ever-increasing" done
 * "On 15 March 1944, Bär, now a Major, was given command of II./Jagdgeschwader 1 (JG 1)." You don't really explain how this was possible considering the previous paragraph and Göring's issues. done
 * "Bär had just landed at Störmede airfield from a II./JG 1 intercept when the smoking B-24 of 458th Bombardment Group passed overhead." I'd prefer readers not have to click the link just to find out the nationality of this plane. done
 * Is "scrambled" common vocabulary? It's probably pilot jargon. done
 * "The operation resulted in hundreds of aircraft lost ..." More grammatical: "hundreds of aircraft losses" done
 * "Half a dozen" is too colloquial. done
 * "Pritzl Bär possibly flew his first operational sortie with JV 44 on 27 April 1945 ..." As far as I can see, you've not referred to him by his nickname at all - why now? done
 * -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment, thanks for addressing my list but I'm still uneasy about this one. I'm short on time for now but I'll try to come back and do a fresh read-through. The frequent interruption for German translation makes the prose jarring - personally, I'd rather just see the German text (ex. "Oberst Werner Mölders" with a wikilink instead of "Colonel (Oberst) Werner Mölders" with both titles wikilinked) in some cases. In the case of the awards, I'm not sure the German text is warranted. I'm assuming if they click the link, the award's article will provide the German translation? Further, the prose is just not smooth in many places, with 3 or more clauses strung together making sentences hard to digest. -- Laser brain  (talk)  18:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback! The last two reviewers suggested that everything should be in English, since we're writing for an English speaking audience. I therefore distorted the article to its current state to meet their concerns. (It was using the German terms to begin with, which didn't suit them). The problem is that we don't have identical words for every German rank, position, formation, you name it. I wonder if we have guidelines for this? Personally I would rather use the German terms. Even those references in English use the German terms MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, our Manual of Style states that "foreign words should be used sparingly" but in this case, most of your use of German seems to be official titles or proper nouns. If there is no translation, you just use the German and place it in italics. I suppose I'm at odds with Sarcasticidealist and the MoS over the other items (like Captain vs. Hauptmann). However, I'm willing to bend to whatever the consensus is. Thanks for all your hard work - I will return later with more comments. -- Laser brain  (talk)  19:02, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support, I made a few more changes and I think this is ready now. -- Laser brain  (talk)  00:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.