Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Hans-Joachim Marseille


 * 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.

Hans-Joachim Marseille
The article passed GA without much problem. I think it can achieve A-class as well soon. Let's see what is missing. MisterBee1966 (talk) 03:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I find the excess number of tables begining about 1/2 the way down the article distracting; while I will not oppose for this I am curious to know why the information couldn;r simply be in paragraph form.
 * Otherwise, it looks good. Well Done. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Looks good.  As Tom points out, the lists and tables at the bottom might give you some trouble if you nominate the article for Featured status.  But, I don't have a problem with them. Cla68 (talk) 08:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I think the "summary" would be better in a table form and not a bulleted list. Is it not covered in the text anyway? I don't like the garish colours as well. I think the memorial would look better as a blockquote, or at least with no colour. The same goes for "The references in the Wehrmachtsbericht" in terms of colour. I don't think it would get through FAC. Woody (talk) 13:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks everyone for the constructive review effort. I feel that I need to comment on why I chose to present some of the information in a color-coded table. Roughly 60% percent of my references are available in German language only (at least to my knowledge), this includes the pictures/copies of the actual German documents as available via the references I state in the article. To present this data, very evident in the section of the Wehrmachtsbericht, I had to translate this information from German to English myself. Some editor may find my wording strange or not inline with future literature available in the English-speaking world. The German quotes in the article are the exact wording of my references. I consider it therefore undisputable. The red coded text is my translation should be subject to improvements by other editors. Now I am hesitant to change this style on the basis of personal preferences by some of the editors alone (which does not mean I will not change this, please point to style guides). I am looking for more guidance on how to convey this message. Thanks again for the great work.MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

After this issues will be fixed, I will support the nomination. --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 11:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The article is good per overall, but I found some problems with referencing:
 * 1.Marseille's kill rate was slow, and he went from June to August without a victory. He was further frustrated after damage forced him to land on two occasions: once on 14 June and again after he was hit by ground fire over Tobruk and was forced to land blind. - this sentence needs a ref;✅
 * 2.To counter German fighter attacks, the Allied pilots flew "Lufbery circles" (in which each aircraft's tail was covered by the friendly aircraft behind). The tactic was effective and dangerous as a pilot attacking this formation could find himself constantly in the sights of enemy pilots. Marseille often dived at high speed into the middle of these enemy defensive formations from either above or below, executing a tight turn and firing a two-second deflection shot to destroy an enemy aircraft. He attacked under conditions many considered unfavorable, but his marksmanship allowed him to make an approach fast enough to escape the return fire of the two aircraft flying on either flank of the target. Marseille's excellent eyesight made it possible for him to spot the enemy before he was spotted, allowing him to take the appropriate action and manoeuvre himself into position for an attack. - this entire paragraph would certainly need referencing;✅ Mike Spick in his book (pages 120 to 124) gives a good (incl. Graphical) description of Marseille’s fighting style. The part pertaining to the article is on page 123.MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * 3.Marseille flew four different Bf 109F-4/Trop aircraft: - this would also need a ref;✅
 * 4.Regarding the "Victory claims and notable actions" section, I propose to restructure it and post the source for all those claims (which is Wübbe if I noticed properly) somewhere at the top of the section.✅ converted to table as sugested before. MisterBee1966 (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Just one more thing - Marseille's 151 claims in North Africa included: - this needs a ref.✅ However, i'm going to support the nomination, even if I don't think it will pass an FAC in the near future. --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 21:14, 13 January 2008 (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.