Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Roderic Dallas/archive1


 * 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 01:00, 4 April 2010.

Roderic Dallas

 * Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk), Georgejdorner (talk), 12:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Nominating this major revamp of an old article on a great pilot and leader of men in World War I, generally reckoned to be second only to Robert Little on the list of highest-scoring Australian aces, but given Dallas' almost complete indifference to making claims, who knows? This is a joint effort and nomination with Georgejdorner, who added a great deal of information gleaned from the subject's sole full-length biography, while I looked after the format and added some further detail from other sources. Recently promoted to A-Class in the MilHist and Aviation projects, and also a Good Article. For me this is also a WikiCup entry... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments. No links to dab pages, and no dead external links. Ucucha 17:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Tks guys. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support: I supported this article for A class and see no reason why I shouldn't support for FA. I believe that this is an excellent article that meets the criteria. Well done to both Ian and George. — AustralianRupert (talk) 23:52, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I too supported this at the Project ACR; I thought then it was one of the finest articles I'd read in a while, and I still think so. I appreciated the way the editors explained the technicalities of early combat aviation. Instead of glossing over how Dallas did this and that, they explained the different kinds of maneuvers,  the problems with establishing the number of "kills", etc.  I'll be interested to hear what other reviewers who are not in the Project have to say about this article.  Obviously Rupert and I think it's top notch.  Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Many tks for your reviews, Rupert and Ruth. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support The article is incredibly comprehensive. Shockfront (talk) 18:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support very detailed content and cross-referencing  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  04:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support This is an excellent article which easily meets the criteria Nick-D (talk) 07:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Tks all! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - just a quick comment from me from me for now: a number of the web sources are without access dates, and one could use correct formatting. Also, as I brought up once before in one of your articles, you have entered the Red Baron as "Baron Manfred von Richthofen" when in German titles the "von" means baron, making "Baron" redundant and slightly incorrect. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 23:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Good catches, especially after all the time they've been sitting like that - ta! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:18, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Please find someone to do an image review. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Requested of Awadewit. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.