Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Charles Heaphy


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Anotherclown (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2016 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Charles Heaphy

 * Nominator(s): Zawed (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because I believe it meets the necessary criteria. Charles Heaphy may be a slightly unusual subject for Milhist; in addition to his military exploits (he was the first non-regular soldier to be awarded the VC), he was also a painter, explorer, surveyor, amateur geologist, politician and civil servant. In fact, he is probably more known for his exploration endeavours in New Zealand, with the Heaphy Track named for him. The article went through a GA review back in October 2014 and I have tidied it up a little since then. I hope reviewers find the article interesting; I certainly did as I expanded it from the starter it first was when I found it. Zawed (talk) 10:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:HeaphyCharles.jpg: when/where was this first published?
 * Not sure entirely; I have been able to find what I believe are cropped versions of the image in newspapers published in 1940. I have amended the source information for the image. Not sure what else I can do. Zawed (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay. The image currently has a tag stating it's PD in the US due to pre-1923 publication - if 1940 is the earliest we can find, that tag will need replacing. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, I have just managed to figure out it was published in the Cyclopedia of New Zealand (Auckland Provincial District) (link here: http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz//tm/scholarly/tei-Cyc02Cycl-t1-body1-d1-d10-d23.html). This dates from 1902 so the PD tag is appropriate. Zawed (talk) 03:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Excellent - with that info on the image description we should be good to go. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks.


 * File:The_repulse_of_the_royal_navy_storming_party_rangiriri_pa.jpg needs a US PD tag, and if the caption is accurate then the author is not Cowan. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:46, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Have amended the information for the image. Thanks for the image review. Zawed (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments: As always, feel free to revert. Recently, I've been doing the same things at A-class that I've been doing at Peer Review, and not supporting or opposing. I've copyedited down to Service with the New Zealand Company and skimmed the rest, and I don't think prose issues will be a problem at WP:FAC. If you take the article there, I'll be happy to support on prose and copyedit the rest (eventually). - Dank (push to talk) 15:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dan! Zawed (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Support: overall, this looks up to snuff (interestingly enough, I'm sure I have walked past this man's grave as a child): AustralianRupert (talk) 23:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * he was 'Chief Surveyor to the General Government of New Zealand' --> I think the MOS prefers double quotation marks;
 * appointment as 'Trust Commissioner for the Wellington District', dealing --> same as above;
 * appointed 'Commissioner of Gold Fields' --> same as above
 * "1867–1870" --> 1867–70
 * "1859–1867" --> 1859–67
 * one of the weblinks now seems to redirect to a different site: I wonder if this can be corrected?
 * Thanks for the review AR. I have attended to the issues you noted above. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Support -- what an interesting and eventful life, tks for bringing this to ACR, Zawed! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:16, 9 April 2016 (UTC) Thanks Ian, your changes look good. It is always a source of amazement that certain typos/grammar errors slip my notice...Cheers and thanks for the support. Zawed (talk) 08:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Copyedited as usual; some might be down to personal preference so don't hesitate to let me know if you disagree with anything -- overall I found it very well written and easy to follow.
 * Seems comprehensive and logically structured.
 * Sources look reliable and I couldn't spot any obvious formatting errors.
 * Images I of course leave to Nikki's good judgement.
 * Did a quick ce, he comes across as a bit of a Flashman with the good bits left out. ;O))Keith-264 (talk) 07:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Keith. Does that mean you will adding your support? ;) Cheers. Zawed (talk) 08:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * G'day all, this one has been open just short of two months. It looks like it is close to ready, but still needs one more support. If anyone is free, would you mind taking a look and offering an opinion? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Support Looks excellent to me. My only suggestion is that the fact that he was the first non-regular soldier to be awarded the Victoria Cross should be added top the lead. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support, I have expanded the lead as per your suggestion. Zawed (talk) 08:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.