Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mary Bell (aviator)/archive1

Mary Bell (aviator)

 * Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

This article is a follow-up -- or indeed a prequel -- to that of Clare Stevenson, the long-serving director of the Women's Auxiliary Australian Air Force (WAAAF), the first and ultimately largest women's military service in wartime Australia. Mary Bell led the WAAAF for the first three months of its existence but, more importantly, had played a significant role agitating for its establishment. One can imagine her reaction upon being passed over for permanent command of her baby in favour of corporate executive Stevenson, but Bell was persuaded to put aside her disappointment and ended up serving in the WAAAF for most of the war, if in a minor capacity. This is one of my shorter bios but I think the detail is comprehensive considering the subject's career; the article passed a MilHist A-Class Review in January, since when I've added some further detail. Thanks in advance for your comments! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support from PM
I looked this over at Milhist ACR, and have reviewed changes since. I only have a couple of comments: That's all I could find, great job with this. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * suggest "Returning to Australia, on 20 March 1928 she became the first female to gain a pilot's licence in Victoria, and the sixth in Australia."
 * Fair enough -- done.
 * Bective is Countess but also Lady, I thought they were different ranks?
 * I think "Lady" is generic and I've seen her referred to both ways in sources, but happy to make consistent (to be fair, the source image caption uses "Countess").
 * Many thanks PM. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:56, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Easy support. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:12, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Dank
Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. I couldn't find anything to do! - Dank (push to talk) 12:59, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dan! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:19, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Source review
Spotchecks not done.


 * FN: author name is misspelled
 * Fixed.
 * FN27: the RAAF is part of the publisher, not a work title. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:09, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Well I was going for consistency with the World War 2 Nominal Roll title and publisher, although obviously the RAAF is an organisation and the WW2 Roll isn't; would it work better to use the Website parameter for those two titles?
 * No - it makes sense to use website for WW2 Nominal Roll, but for the RAAF you can just use a two-part publisher
 * Sorry if I'm slow on the uptake, Nikki, but is the current version more what you had in mind? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That works. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:04, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Tks Nikki -- could I trouble you to check the images as well? One pic is just a crop of another, so two licenses only... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:47, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support

 * "for a Grade A private pilot'" - I'm a pilot and have no idea what this is. Is there a link?
 * I've been asked this before and not found a link/explanation, even trawling through the Flight International archive. I think it means 'unlimited' but couldn't prove that.
 * OK, this is worthy of a EFN with exactly that text.
 * Linked per response to Cass. Ian Rose (talk) 13:35, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * "herself as Australian Commandant" - meaning a higher level of the hierarchy, or the capital region? The preceding statement suggests the organization was regional but I suspect this statement implies there is a second level.
 * I always read this as it being a federated model, the Australian commandant in overall charge, with state commandants below -- do you think this could be expressed better?
 * You just did... but do the refs actually describe the structure at any point? It's all too easy to SYN here.


 * "free male staff for overseas postings.[9][11] In July 1940, the new " - para break here
 * New para starting with "In July 1940, the new..."? To me this followed naturally from the preceding "She continued to lobby...", or do you feel the para as it is is too long?
 * The following text represents a sea-change and I think it should stand alone. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. Ian Rose (talk) 13:35, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Looks great! Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Tks for reviewing, Maury. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:11, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Cass
Marking my place with comments to come.  Cassianto Talk  21:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Lede
 * "She and her husband later became farmers. Nicknamed "Paddy", Mary Bell died in 1979, aged seventy-five." -- Unless I've missed it, there is no mention of the nickname in the body. Also, blitz "Mary", no need for the first name here.
 * That's correct, hence the citation -- unless the source says when she acquired the nickname I think this sort of thing is best placed towards the end of the lead. I had "Mary" because we'd just mentioned her husband but that was probably being too careful...
 * With respect, I think it was. We don't even mention his name so the confusion is absent, at least on my part.   Cassianto Talk  17:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Early life and WATC
 * We flip from Britain to England. Consistency is key.  Britain is a big place, England is more concise, if indeed that is where he comes from? "Britain" also sounds awfully old fashioned.
 * "England" should be fine, will do.
 * From my emerging work on Amy Johnson, I've come to learn that a "Grade A private pilot's licence" is the same as this. Link?
 * Sure, tks.


 * World War II and WAAAF
 * "Australia having declared war on 3 September 1939" → "With Australia having declared war on 3 September 1939..."
 * I wonder if it's an AusEng thing because "With" at the beginning seems wrong, or at least redundant, to me...
 * Nope, it's a "you are more knowledgable than I am" thing as I've sought advice and now bow to your brilliance.  Cassianto Talk  17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "She continued to lobby, as did several women's groups seeking to support the war effort and free male staff for overseas postings." -- is there a comma missing from somewhere? Perhaps after "groups"?
 * The source is saying that she continued to lobby, and so did several women's groups that were seeking to support the war effort and free male staff for overseas postings -- perhaps I can express it better (or perhaps I just did)?
 * You did, much better.  Cassianto Talk  17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "In July 1940, the new Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Charles Burnett..." -- deletion of "chief" and "air". Do we need both introductions?  I would drop the one just before his name.
 * As anyone on the receiving end of one of my copyedits can tell you, I like to reduce repetition, but in this case I think it's justified -- the first bit is a position, the second a rank, and he's the first head of the RAAF to be an air chief marshal so I think it's worth mentioning.
 * Fair enough.  Cassianto Talk  17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "Despite Bell's recommendation in July 1940 that they be enlisted into the WAAAF as permanent staff..." -- they? Women?  I'd replace they with women rather than leaving it to later in the sentence.
 * Fair enough.
 * "She also suggested a volunteer reserve or citizen force to augment the enlisted women, effectively the existing WATC, though this was seen as placing too much emphasis on her personal command." -- " effectively" suggests POV and is a tad conversational.
 * I'm not sure it's that controversial or POV, I believe the wording reflects the source. Happy to discuss alternate wording but I think to be accurate it'd have to effectively be the same as "effectively"... ;-)
 * Conversational. I maintain my position, but it sounds like you disagree. No fuss.  Cassianto Talk  17:37, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Later life
 * "Ranked flight officer, Mary Bell..." -- why the comma? Why the introduction?
 * Her rank at discharge is in the cited source, and I mentioned it by way of confirming that she did in fact leave the WAAAF at the highest rank to which she agreed to be promoted after she changed her mind about resigning in 1942.
 * Thanks.  Cassianto Talk  17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "The WAAAF, first and largest of Australia's wartime women's services..." any need for the factoid this late on? If so, "the first" would be better.
 * I think it's important to mention these facts about the WAAAF. Admittedly I earlier said under World War II and WAAAF that "the WAAAF was the first uniformed women's branch of an armed service in Australia", so would it make sense to make the bit under Later life read "The WAAAF, Australia's largest wartime women's service..."?
 * Thanks.  Cassianto Talk  17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "It was succeeded in 1950 by a new organisation with a separate charter to the RAAF, the Women's Royal Australian Air Force (WRAAF)" -- "It was succeeded in 1950 by the Women's Royal Australian Air Force (WRAAF) that held a separate charter to the RAAF"
 * Okay.
 * "Survived by her daughter, Mary Bell died in Ulverstone, Tasmania, on 6 February 1979. She was buried at Mersey Vale Memorial Park cemetery in Spreyton, near Devonport, beside her husband, who had died in 1973." A few things here: Firstly, no need for "Mary".  Secondly, two "died"'s in close succession. Thirdly, I don't feel a need to mention Bell's daughter outliving her mother, unlike I would if she had predeceased her. Fourthly, "near Drayton"?  Surely, it's "near" a number of places, why Drayton?  Suggest: "Bell died in Ulverstone, Tasmania, on 6 February 1979, and was buried beside her husband, who predeceased her in 1973, at Mersey Vale Memorial Park cemetery in Spreyton.
 * Happy with your rewording but I'd prefer to keep "Survived by her daughter" at the beginning; this seems quite a normal thing in my source bios. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No issues, thanks for writing this excellent article. Support   Cassianto Talk  17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for helping make it better than before, Cass. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Tks Cass, busy right now but hope to get to these over the next few days. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:53, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Support by Gog the Mild

 * In the lead, does "Director" need the upper case D?
 * Perhaps not -- "Director WAAAF" seems to be a proper name but I guess "director" (and "deputy director" for that matter) on its own isn't.
 * Can I echo Maury's comment re the Grade A licence. IMO it needs some sort of explanation in line or a footnote. Or removing.
 * Linked now per Cass.
 * "The Bells moved to Brisbane in 1939; John was employed as Queensland manager for Airlines of Australia Ltd, having left the RAAF in 1929" Does this mean that John was employed by AAL from 1929? And did he continue to be employed by them after the move to Brisbane? Or did the move mark the start of this employment - which is how I read it.
 * I believe the move marks the start of that employment but the source doesn't make it explicit.
 * "She continued to lobby, as did several women's groups seeking to support the war effort" Possibly 'other' after "several"?
 * Fair enough.
 * "this was seen as placing too much emphasis on her personal command" Do we know by whom it was so seen?
 * I don't have the source with me but I think if it was explicit I'd have said so -- the implication is that it's the RAAF hierarchy.
 * Is it known what Bell did between May 1941 and October 1942?
 * Secondary sources don't make it clear but a couple of newspaper articles from June 1941 state that she was again Australian Commandant of the WATC; I refrained from putting this in though as neither article dealt with the fact that Countess Bective, who had taken command of the WATC on Bell's appointment to the WAAAF in Feb 1941, must have handed back command to Bell when the latter left the WAAAF.
 * "all previously occupied by men" Possibly 'all previously occupied only by men'?
 * Hmm, personally I think the meaning is clear without the extra word... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 11:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Tks Gog, ditto reply to Cass. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Ian. All good and I am supporting. Personally I would fill the May 1941 to October 1942 gap, even if it begs a question, but I will eave that one with you. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gog, on further investigation of the newspaper archive, it looks like Bective continued to lead the WATC after Bell left the WAAAF the first time in 1941; one source, from June 1941, even states clearly that Bell "is, for the moment, returning to private life", but as this source is The Australasian, a picture magazine, I'm a bit dubious about using it in a potential FA. I think though that by the lack of any media mentions to the contrary, we can assume Bell did little of note in WP terms between June 1941 and October 1942. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:16, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments by JennyOz
Thanks Ian, JennyOz (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "Her maternal great-great grandfather" - ADB says great-granddaughter of Jonathan Griffiths so only one "great"?
 * I read it as Mary's mother was the great-granddaughter and so Mary must be a great-great-granddaughter...?
 * Yes sorry, I had misread it.
 * "St Andrew's Anglican Church in Brighton" - wlink St Andrew's Church, Brighton?
 * Done, tks.
 * "auxiliary services" - wlink Auxiliaries?
 * Done.
 * "Burnett, invited her to produce a proposal for a women's auxiliary, supervised by her husband John" - ambiguous? ie was John to supervise the proposal or the auxiliary?
 * Tweaked, see what you think.
 * "on the condition that she received no promotion higher" - ambiguous? change to 'on her condition'?
 * Fair enough re. ambiguity but didn't really like "her condition" -- pls see what you think of my rewording.
 * Thank you, Jenny! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:13, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Last suggestion, "They had a daughter" - maybe add year 1926 ref
 * Thanks Ian, all good. My last suggestion not essential so I am happy to add my support. Regards, JennyOz (talk) 05:27, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Added that, thanks again for reviewing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:25, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Image review


 * I'm a bit confused by the licensing on the first two images - if the author is The Argus, why would The Age hold copyright? Our article on the latter suggests that they were rival papers. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:32, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed they were but the copyright notice for the image seems to support the licensing -- the Argus closed in 1957, so I guess the Age got some of their assets. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd be interested to know how that happened, as it would have impacted transfer of copyright. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Is it up to us to pursue that though? Aside from the image being out of copyright in Australia anyway owing to its age, the transfer of ownership and the gifting has obviously satisfied the State Library of Victoria, a government institution... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm quite happy to accept that it's PD in Australia - the issue is more the US status, whether The Age had the rights to provide for worldwide release. However, I think on reflection we'll take the gifting as sufficient. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:23, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Comment by CPA-5
I only have this comment nice article. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:55, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Air Vice-Marshal v. Air Vice Marshal
 * The former -- well-spotted, tks. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  00:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)