Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Valston Hancock/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 Karanacs 13:56, 28 July 2011.

Valston Hancock

 * Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk) 23:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

This nom follows on naturally from the recently successful John McCauley FAC, i.e. similar subject matter, style and sourcing. From 1954 to 1969, the RAAF was headed by a remarkable series of Chiefs whose most frequently cited common attribute was their status as former cadets of the Royal Military College, Duntroon&mdash;that is, they studied as Army officers before joining the Air Force. They were Air Marshals McCauley, Scherger, Hancock and Murdoch. McCauley and Scherger have been through FAC, and now it’s time for the other two, starting with Hancock, whose article has recently passed GA and MilHist A-Class reviews. Murdoch, also GA/A, will follow (you've been warned)... ;-) Thanks in advance for any input! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * FN 2: cited in References under Commonwealth of Australia
 * FN 44: check italicization. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Done -- tks as ever. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 19:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "extended for an additional twelve months beyond its original three years": Hard call for me here because it doesn't sound wrong to my ear, but logically, with three words giving the same sense (extended, additional, original), it ought to be possible to delete something ... how about "an additional"? - Dank (push to talk) 19:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're quite right, "additional" is not needed in there.
 * Re. Though fastidious in appearance and a strict teetotaller, he was known for his enthusiasm in meeting staff and as "an indefatigable participant in mess functions and games", the contrast I was implying with "though" reflected the way it was presented in the source, no doubt because the more raucous mess activities generally involve(d) a lot of drinking and could become quite, well, messy -- so I'd rather keep it there unless you can suggest another way to put it (preferably without using "however", which is a bit common, or "nevertheless", which is in the source)... ;-) Tks for reviewing! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:01, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, that's fine. - Dank (push to talk) 18:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Image Review - Everything checks out.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  12:19, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Tks for that, Sven. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Support, per my review for A-class. The only thing I would say is that you really should find a better place for File:Hancock1930s.jpg. Granted, I have quite a small screen, but it seems to squeeze the text between the image and the infobox. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   14:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Support Comments after reading through the article a few times. Carcharoth (talk) 01:47, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Updated: 23:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC) Other than those points, looks to be a well-written article. One question on one of the sources: Looked over the other sources as well, and couldn't see any problems with the citation styles or layout. Carcharoth (talk) 01:47, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Language is a bit stilted at times. I know "the award was promulgated" is technically correct, but when you see other instances of formal language, such as "none eventuated" and "His name is borne by", it starts to add up. The writing level could be dropped a few notches to improve readability.
 * I'll have another read through and see about taking the odd thing down a notch or two. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * This sentence in the lead feels too long and the 'however' feels misplaced: "His administrative training at Duntroon saw him primarily occupy staff posts, however, including Deputy Director of Operations and Intelligence at RAAF Headquarters from 1931 to 1935, and Director of Works and Buildings from 1937 to 1939." - I would just drop 'however'.
 * The "however" was there because although trained as a pilot he occupied mostly desk jobs from an early point in his RAAF career, but I don't mind losing it... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It does feel slightly redundant. As you are talking about 'administrative training', you would expect that to lead to desk roles, wouldn't you? Maybe you mean " Due to his administrative training ... he primarily occupied staff posts"? But maybe your sources aren't that explicit. Carcharoth (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * When 'Aitape–Wewak campaign' is mentioned in the lead, not many will know where that is, so maybe throw in a "Pacific Theatre" or "New Guinea" in there somewhere?
 * Should be able to do something... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The mention of 'RAF Malaya' in the lead threw me a bit, as it switches from RAAF to RAF with no explanation. I know there is little room in the lead to do this, but it be made clearer why this would happen? Maybe borrow the 'Commonwealth air forces' wording from the main body of the article?
 * Ditto prev. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In the text of the lead (i.e. not the postnomials bit, but later in the lead) You mention his KBE, but not his CB. Is there a reason one honour is mentioned and not the other?
 * Heh, no reason I guess... ;-) It'll mean spliting the list beginning with DCAS and ending with AOC OPCOM but I can probably get the CB in somehow... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * There is nothing about his mother and father in the early life section. Was he an only child? I presume this is covered in his autobiography, which you have in the 'Further Reading' section. It's not essential, but if someone got hold of a copy of that book and added further details, would you object, or do you think this is unnecessary detail?
 * I tend to leave the autobiographies to further reading when a) the seems sufficient info on the subject from other sources and b) the autobiography is cited by those sources, which means we get some benefit from it but it's filtered through the eyes of a professional historian. Both those are true in this case (Alan Stephens employs Challenge a fair bit) so I didn't think it was worth breaking consistency with my usual approach for say the name of his parents -- that said, I'd be more than happy to check on that in his Who's Who entry if you'd like to see that in particular. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Different historians take different approaches. A military historian will naturally focus on the military elements. A personal biographer (or someone writing an autobiography) will include the personal aspects. I've never managed to work out whether Wikipedia is consistent or not with this, whether Wikipedia should try and follow the approach taken by the major and most reliable sources, or pack as much variety in as possible, drawing on a multitude of source types, and try and strike the right balance. A good guiding principle would be whether the family members get mentioned later in other sources. The cousin did. Presumably the other family members didn't get mentioned as much or at all. Carcharoth (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "In 1937 he was posted to Britain to attend the RAF Staff College, Andover" - is it possible to briefly mention here what the relationship was at the time between the RAAF and the RAF? And between Australia and the UK? And how this changed over the years? Not everyone reading this article will be aware of these matters. The bit about attending the Imperial Defence College in 1949 and the Australian Joint Services Staff ties into this as well.
 * I generally try to 'contextualise' things anyway so happy to see if I can add something short, sweet and cited along those lines. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "surveying and developing a military aerodrome at Evans Head" - you pipe the link to Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome behind the words 'military aerodrome', which strikes me as a bit of an easter egg. It would be better to pipe to whatever the name was at the time, and to delink Evans Head (as there is no need to link to that, as people can get to that article from the more specific one on the aerodrome).
 * I get you, what about just piping the whole of "military aerodrome at Evans Head" to Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that would work. Carcharoth (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Pedantic point - 'World War II' is only mentioned in the section header, not in the text of the section. Ideally, you would make clear in the text of the section that World War II has broken out, rather than rely on readers deducing it from the section header.
 * Can do. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Should the OBE and CBE be mentioned in the lead or infobox, or does the KBE supersede them? (Well, I know it supercedes them, but should they be mentioned?)
 * General rule is only the highest award of a particular order is mentioned in the infobox. No rule against mentioning them at the appropriate spot in the lead, just thought it was a bit excessive (though I agree that CB, as a whole 'nother order, should be in the lead)
 * "Fastidious in appearance and a strict teetotaller, he was known for his enthusiasm in meeting staff and as "an indefatigable participant in mess functions and games"." This bit is good, but it comes a bit late in the article. Would be nice to have it earlier. Is there a reason it is where it is?
 * While I don't doubt these were general characteristics, Stephens specifically mentions them when discussing his Malayan service. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Was the KBE due to being appointed CAS? The timing seems to imply this, but is a reason given anywhere for his KBE (the article is silent on this)?
 * The gong pretty well went with the job in those days, but no-one specifically mentions it re. Hancock so I didn't either. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "The following month he urged pre-emptive strikes against Indonesian air bases using RAAF Canberras from Butterworth in retaliation against incursions into West Malaysia but Britain, which had initially requested Australia's involvement, held back on action." - is a comma needed after 'Malaysia'? Maybe bracket the commas after 'bases' and 'Malaysia'? It is a long sentence and does seem to need a few more commas.
 * Just as a thought, how does this look? "The following month he urged using RAAF Canberras from Butterworth to make pre-emptive strikes against Indonesian air bases, in retaliation for incursions into West Malaysia, but Britain, which had initially requested Australia's involvement, held back on action." I could split into two sentences but probably would need a "however" in the there somewhere... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Eventually worked out what 'north Western Australia' refers to, but it is an awkward construction. Can you not say 'the northern part of Western Australia' to avoid people stumbling and thinking you mean north-western Australia?
 * Heh, I thought what I said was the same as "the northern part of Western Australia" but don't mind changing... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You cite "Dennis et al, Oxford Companion to Australian Military History, p. 254" 15 times. Is this a single-page biography of Hancock in that publication? The way you've cited it doesn't make this clear. I presume that 'Oxford Companion to Australian Military History' does have sub-headers or chapters or alphabetical entries. Could you make clearer what exactly you are referencing here?
 * It's a specific entry titled Hancock, Air Marshal Sir Valston Eldridge -- would you like that mentioned in the reference, treated like a chapter title? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it should be mentioned, yes. Most citation styles and templates accommodate that sort of thing, or they should. And it is the title of the work you are citing, just as you would cite a paper title when published within a journal. Carcharoth (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for taking the time to review, Carcharoth! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've only responded to the points above I thought needed responses. I certainly don't see anything to oppose over. I'll check back (hopefully before the end of the weekend) and see if anything comes up in a second read-through, but it all looks good. Carcharoth (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool. I'm a bit pressed for time for a few more days so I may not get to altering much till mid-next week -- we'll see how we go. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:45, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi again, having started on 2 weeks' leave and finally taught our new modem who's boss, I'm now back on the air and can start looking at these over the weekend. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * At this stage I believe I've addressed in one form or another all but points 1 and 7, which will take some more time, so the article should remain stable for a bit if you want to check the updates. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. All looks good. Am happy to support, and will indicate that above at the start of my comments. Carcharoth (talk) 23:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Many tks, actually I ended up having a go at 1 and 7 as well but must've forgotten to hit the save button when mentioning it here -- you gathered they were addressed anyway so no harm done... ;-) Cheers, Ian


 * Suppport Great work as normal Ian. I do have two minor comments though:
 * "Hancock was responsible for surveying and developing a military aerodrome at Evans Head, near the Queensland and New South Wales border" - was this while he was the head of the Directorate of Works and Buildings (during which time I imagine that he oversaw the development of many new airfields by the men under this command) or a separate post?
 * Reworded a bit. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:05, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "In March 1957, Hancock was one of three candidates, along with Air Vice Marshals Frederick Scherger and Allan Walters, touted as possible successors to Air Marshal Sir John McCauley as Chief of the Air Staff (CAS), the RAAF's senior position. " - there's a bit too much going on in this sentence, and it might be best to split it (eg, to something like "In March 1957, Hancock was one of the candidates touted as possible successors to Air Marshal Sir John McCauley as Chief of the Air Staff (CAS), the RAAF's senior position. The other two officers considered for this post were Air Vice Marshals Frederick Scherger and Allan Walters." Nick-D (talk) 11:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Tks mate, will try to get to those over the w/e. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Spotchecks
 * Spot checked a few online sources. The article accurately reflects the sources and I didn't find copying or close paraphrasing. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to do that, much appreciated. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.