Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Otto Becher


 * 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.

Otto Becher

 * Promoted --Eurocopter (talk) 19:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nominator(s): Abraham, B.S. (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because I believe it meets the criteria. A rear admiral in the Royal Australian Navy as well as distinguished serviceman of both the Second World War and Korean War, this article was just launched into the mainspace after several days of work in my sandbox. Many thanks as well as appreciation to Ian Rose for contributing the vast majority of information on Becher's service in the Korean War. Any and all comments welcome. Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Support with caveat, noted above by Bryce, of having done most of the Inter-bellum and Korean War section. However I believe the article as a whole is well up to standard in structure, prose, referencing and illustration. Well worthy of A-Class - a fine effort. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 *  Comments 
 * In the lead you might want to mention when he was promoted to Rear Admiral.
 * Done. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The bit about the sinking of the Robert J. Walker is somewhat unclear, it explains about the plan for towing, talks about rescuing survivors, and then says that it sunk. It would be better to mention something like "By the time they arrived at the scene, however, Robert J. Walker had sunk..." and then explain about the survivors and lifeboats.
 * I have tweaked it slightly, but I don't really see how it was unclear. HMAS Quickmatch and Kiama arrived in the area first, but the SS Robert J. Walker was wasn't there so they continued their search and after several hours discovered the crew in lifeboats, with the ship having sunk two hours earlier. If you still think it is unclear, though, I can try and rewrite it. :) Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "the United States planned invasion of Okinawa." This sounds awkward, perhaps it could be rephrased to make it clear that the United States is planning to do an invasion.
 * Re-arranged. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How would you "wrap" a message in a potato? Hollow it out and stick it in the middle? That bit doesn't make much sense to me.
 * I have changed it to "around" as that is what I think is ment. However, I have asked Ian for confirmation on this as he was the one that added that snippet. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Begorrah, these literal-minded people...! Yep, 'around' is meant... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Otherwise it looks good, so fix these and I'll support it. – Joe   N  16:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, Joe. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * All look good now, supporting. – Joe   N  21:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. Good to go. Cla68 (talk) 06:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC) Comment/question:
 * The text for this image appears to have been copied directly off of the AWM site, indicated by the fact that it's in all caps. It needs to be put in normal prose and reworded a little so that it won't be a copyviolation.
 * I didn't upload that image, but I have seen that a few editors do tend to use the copy-paste method for AWM captions. Will reword though. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why did you hotlink the Gill and O'Neil citations to the References list at the bottom of the article? I've never seen that done before. Cla68 (talk) 04:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Umm, Cla, I do that in all of "my" articles that use book sources! :) This comes through using Template:Harvnb. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:29, 28 April 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.