Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/George Alan Vasey


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

George Alan Vasey

 * Passed --Eurocopter (talk) 13:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, another A-class review request. This time for an article on one of Australia's best known and best loved generals. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC) Some general comments; I will take a more in depth review later: Again, I will comment more later. :) JonCatalán(Talk) 05:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * JonCatalán
 * 1) The reliance on Horner may be considered an over-reliance.  This issues was brought up to me during the A-class review for the TAM (tank), although the article eventually did pass its FAC (although I had to scour for more sources).  This isn't enough to oppose from past experience, so it wouldn't be fair for me to oppose; but then again, I didn't really plan to anyways. :)  Are there no more sources available?
 * Not really, no. We should be glad that there is even one book on him - many of his contempories are not so lucky. But less that half the sources are from David, and three of his books are cited. The only alternative is to bypass him and go back to the Vasey papers. However, I have cut back the number of references.
 * 1) I think that the World War II section can be improved in a number of ways; first, divide with at least a subsection somewhere.  It's currently very long, and would profit from an organizational division somewhere in it (or two, if possible).  Second, some paragraphs are very short, so it makes the prose look very choppy.  Perhaps some paragraphs can be merged; this would also help shorten the length of that section (a lot of short paragraphs have a lot of empty space between them, increasing the length of the page).
 * 2) For future reference, all measurements should be converted. I'll go ahead and do it for you, since there are not many of them.
 * ✅ thanks for that. At the time the article was originally written, there was some technical problem with the conversion templates. I still have a lot of trouble with them. The templates need a great deal of work before it can become standard practice for all measurements can be converted.
 * 1) I think the notes would look better if you took out the book title and divided them into three columns; it would look nicer.  This isn't really something you should worry about for an ACR or a FAC, but I do think it would make the article more aesthetically appealing.
 * I have set to three columns. Since not all browsers support multi-columns anyway, making it look nicer is neither here nor there really. My personal preference is for the title, but I can automatically convert to the harvnb format.
 * 1) Per MoS, text should not be squeezed between images.  The images either have to be spread out, or some removed.
 * ✅ Removed a couple.
 * ✅ Removed a couple.
 * (@ #5) See MOS:IMAGE, Hawkeye. — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  01:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment Is it possible to get a narrower page range for the footnotes using Dexter. A page range of 25 seems quite vague.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 02:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments ✅ Removed. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As there is a "Death and Legacy" section, why is there then a separate "Legacy" section?
 * "Vasey was killed in the crash along with all those on board. He became the fourth most senior Australian officer to die in World War II, after General Sir Cyril Brudenell White, Lieutenant General Henry Douglas Wynter, and Major General Rupert Downes (who died in the same plane crash as Vasey)." - this section is referenced to a Commonwealth War Graves Commission entry for Vasey which does not cover anything at all in the section it is attached to. Please attach a reliable citation that does actually cover this section, and make sure that every reference/citation you have used in the article completely covers the imformation it is attached to.
 * Ref 9 requires an access date.
 * ✅ Though Lord knows why.
 * True, but's it's just in case the link breaks so it's easier to repair. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Support Comments Intro:
 * As much an aesthetic as an informational thing but can we even up the paragraphs lengths in the intro? Suggest either combine the first two and have two in total or expand the first two and have three of more equal size.
 * I think paintings work better in Retirement or Legacy sections than in the infobox; do I assume there’s no decent photographic portrait of him at AWM?
 * ❌ Pretty much. The best ones are of him as a brigadier. All are in black and white. As a rule, I'll always prefer a painting to a photograph.
 * ❌ Pretty much. The best ones are of him as a brigadier. All are in black and white. As a rule, I'll always prefer a painting to a photograph.

Ealy life:
 * "Canberra" is all that's needed as the location for RMC, not "Canberra, Australia".
 * ✅ Dubious. The reason was the form it appeared in the Wikipedia. I think there's an MOS somewhere that says that the country should be added unless the city is well known - which Canberra is not. An Australian reader will know where Duntroon is. A foreign reader will likely assume that RMC is in Canada.

World War I:
 * Don't need the "was" in "and was awarded the Distinguished Service Order".
 * Think it looks better to put the citation for the DSO after "His recommendation read:" rather than after the recommendation block quote.
 * Think it looks better to put the citation for the DSO after "His recommendation read:" rather than after the recommendation block quote.

Between the wars:
 * There seems to be some inconsistency about re. capitalising of ranks in this section - if there's a logic to it I didn't pick it...
 * ✅ ranks are capitalised only when part of a title.

Middle East and Greece:
 * As Jon says, text shouldn't be sandwiched between two pics. Perhaps this could be obviated by shortening the very lengthy captions and breaking up the second para into two, as a break.
 * ✅ "Sandwiching" only refers to having a left and right together. Obviously pictures will be on both sides if the standard of alternating is adhered to.
 * Also suggest swapping those two pics so the main subject, Vasey, is facing 'inwards' (i.e. from the right to the left) in his photo with Blamey; the one of the women seeing off the ship will go just as well on the left as the right.

Papuan Campaign:
 * Wouldn't "chief of staff" in "chief of staff of Home Forces" be capitalised?
 * If you're going mention the "revolt of the generals" I think we need a little more detail - I assume their main target was the Commander-in-Chief at the time (i.e. before Blamey returned) but who was that?
 * No, there was no commander-in-chief at the time. They felt that Bennett or Lavarack would appointed. The text is a pretty good version of the story. In view of the fact that the country was in danger, they wanted to summarily retire everyone over 50. It's not too late to do it now...
 * If there was no C-inC at the time, leave as is. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "A series of brilliant operations followed" seems a bit opinionated - can we say "decisive" or something else?
 * "A series of brilliant operations followed" seems a bit opinionated - can we say "decisive" or something else?

New Guinea Campaign:
 * Suggest switch the photo to the left to maintain alternate sides for the pics.
 * ❌ You can't put a left pic at the start of a paragraph. So I removed a pic to allow it to go on the right.
 * You can't?! I've done so in A- and FA-nominated articles and had no objections. However, end result is the same here so no prob. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Death and Legacy: Overall, I think this can make the grade but needs some tidying per above first. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Legacy" shouldn't be capitalised in the heading, per MOS.
 * ✅ Never understood the rationale behind this.
 * Heh, I don't necessarily agree with some things in MOS either but for the sake of a quite life... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There a lot of short paras in this section; suggest combining a few.
 * "Vasey demonstrated beyond all doubt" seems a bit strong; I think "Vasey demonstrated" would be sufficient.
 * "Although his reputation has faded with time, the Australian Army's benchmark for the fighting commander remains where he left it" should be cited.
 * ✅ Switched quotes.
 * "Although his reputation has faded with time, the Australian Army's benchmark for the fighting commander remains where he left it" should be cited.
 * ✅ Switched quotes.
 * I think it's looking good now and am happy to support. My only remaining comment is that now I view it again, I believe the Death and legacy section is too large and the last two paras should again be broken out into a separate Legacy section (the final picture should still fit where it is if desired), this time of course with the previous section dropping the redundant and Legacy. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. A few comments, but nothing very hard to fix.
 * On my laptop monitor, two images are sandwiched in the Middle East and Greece section.
 * ✅. The only possible solution was to remove one of the pictures.
 * "The 19th Infantry Brigade was evacuated to Crete, where his brigade in the Battle of Crete." The second clause has no verb in it.
 * "he was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE),[31] and awarded a Bar to his DSO,[32] and later the Greek War Cross." Shouldn't the first and be removed?
 * "Yet Blamey had not lost faith in Vasey." This is short and sounds choppy and awkward.
 * ✅ Changed full stop to semi-colon
 * The two images immediately after that are also sandwiched.
 * ✅ Tried to avoid it by moving one of the pictures down. Coming up: someone reckons that text is always sandwiched on his 52" monitor.
 * Pfft, anyone who has a 52" monitor deserves to have sandwiched images.
 * For those two images, the captions could use citations as they state facts, instead of just describe what's in the image.
 * "[64]." Refs after punctuation.
 * For those two images, the captions could use citations as they state facts, instead of just describe what's in the image.
 * "[64]." Refs after punctuation.
 * "[64]." Refs after punctuation.


 * Those shouldn't be too hard to fix, so good luck with FA! – Joe Nu  tter  19:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * All looks good now. – Joe Nu  tter  01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments One external link reported to have connection issues, please look into the matter and if necessary replace/remove the link. One disambig link needs to be located and if at all possible fixed. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support a great article which meets the criteria. My suggestions for further development are:
 * Could the coverage of his WWI career be expanded? (there's almost nothing on what he did in 1916 for instance)
 * The article states that Vasey was commended for his work on Crete, but doesn't say what he did there
 * Given that the Generals who commanded operations at Gona-Buna have come in for a lot of criticism over the years, it may be worthwhile to expand this section to explain Vasey's actions and the pressures and constraints he faced
 * Did Vasey drink heavily during operations, and if so did this have any impact? Nick-D (talk) 01:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.