Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk · contribs) 16:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will review shortly. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prelim[edit]

• No edit wars
• No duplicated links (bar postnom)
• Images correctly licensed
• Earwig reports copyvio unlikely

Lede and infobox[edit]

• Link sortie
• Link dogfight
• Could mention in the lede that he later flies Spitfires, right now it suggests that he only flew Hurricanes
• Don't believe nicknames need to be italicized
• Operation Dynamo could be added to the infobox, being separate to the BoB
• His service number (in LGs etc) can be added to infobox

• All the above done. Zawed (talk) 08:29, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Early life[edit]

• Link law clerk

• Done. Zawed (talk) 08:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Barrister and solicitor are different roles, why do they have the same link?

• In NZ, a lawyer can be both, I have several colleagues who are. The barrister article mentions this in the last paragraph of the lead. Zawed (talk) 08:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Link Wellington

• Done. Zawed (talk) 08:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Why was his acceptance provisional?

• I believe it is because it was contingent on him passing flight training. Zawed (talk) 08:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• You link the "civilian flying school" to RAF Prestwick which doesn't immediately make sense

• I doublechecked the source on this and it turns I was being a bit too literal. It was a reserve flying school, not a civilian one. Have rephrased. Zawed (talk) 08:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• You've left the "RAF" before Uxbridge, which I think is against your usual practice

• Fixed. Zawed (talk) 08:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "More advanced flying training followed" Why not include location(s) for this training too?

• I *think* it was still at Hullavington, but the source isn't explicit on this. Zawed (talk) 08:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second World War[edit]

• Link Second World War

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "The squadron was based at Scapa Flow" I was a little confused when reading this (aren't they at Acklington?); suggest rewording sentence to begin with the date of move

• Rephrased as suggested. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Link Royal Navy

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "the following month it was back at Tangmere" The article does not make it obvious that the squadron had moved away from Tangmere in this period, which is what I assume this means

• Rephrased. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggest adding an actual mention of the Battle of Britain to main text

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Not clear what "a section" would be - is this a flight?

• Linked - there is a section in the linked article for usage in air forces. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Possibly useful to link bailed out

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Link perspex

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Did North see any operational flying with 96 Sqn?

• Probably but the sources don't explicitly say. I've add mention of a course that he attended during his time there.

• Link acting

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Link sorties

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Practice suggests you should add what bombers he was escorting, if possible

• Sources don't provide this info. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Is Marquise this Marquise?

• Done. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Could be useful to expand on the tally uncertainty - which kills are the dodgy ones?

• I have attempted to clarify. Zawed (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

• References look good.

@Zawed: Hi, that's my initial run through completed. Will await replies. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 09:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe:, thanks for the detailed review. I have responded to your various points above, and this is ready for you to take another look. Thanks again, Zawed (talk) 09:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Zawed: Looks good. My only quibble is that the service number needs a reference. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:12, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I added mention of it in the main body rather than cite it only in the infobox. Zawed (talk) 08:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to pass this article as satisfying the GA criteria. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]