Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/John Balmer

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.

Promoted EyeSerene^talk 12:57, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Balmer[edit]

Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk)

Following extensive service in the Pacific theatre, this chap preceded William Brill, whom some of you may remember from recent A/FA reviews, as commanding officer of No. 467 Squadron RAAF during the air war in Europe. It's a bit shorter than Brill's article but, given Balmer lived an even briefer life, I don't think it's lacking in any detail and should at least have the legs for A-Class. Any and all comments welcome! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:29, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support I reviewed this article for GA status, and think that the A class criteria are also met. I do have some suggestions for further improvement though:
- This this a bit pedantic, but was 100 Sqn really "the RAAF's first Bristol Beaufort unit"? I would have assumed that an operational conversion unit would have been formed before the aircraft were issued to squadrons. On the other hand, things were rather chaotic at the time (the first P-40 squadrons seemed to have had to convert themselves across to the aircraft in a matter of days at about this time)
  - Gillison describes it in those words so I've given him the benefit of the doubt... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "which had been "cannibalised" from the base's resident unit" would probably be a bit unclear for people who aren't familiar with how military units are formed. It might be best to simplify this to something like 'formed by splitting the base's resident unit'. This would also allow the next sentence to be simplified, as at present it's a bit repetitive
  - Heh, think we discussed at GA -- I like "cannibalised" and it's a std term in such cases but will have another look. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It might be worth noting 100 Sqn's unusual genesis (eg, that it was formed around a nucleus of RAF personnel from the remnants of No. 100 Squadron RAF)
  - I can mention that using Gillison. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The book Song of the Beauforts will probably have material on Balmer as well as background on 100 Sqn
  - Tks mate, might see if the Mitchell has a copy. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Do we know why Balmer was awarded an OBE in June 1942?
  - Heh, I always check the AWM's recommendations for awards and this particular one just says "records destroyed" -- so no luck... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "The ship (often misidentified as the Tenyo Maru)" - what its actual name was isn't specified
  - I was curious myself but Gillison doesn't offer any suggestions, just that it was not Tenyo Maru -- if you think it's confusing or annoying the way it is, I can drop mention of Tenyo Maru entirely. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Maybe drop it - if we only know which ship it wasn't then there's not much scope for confusion. Nick-D (talk) 10:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Will do. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "the unit delivered 17,000 pounds (7,700 kg) of bombs" - I'd suggest that you replace 'delivered' with 'dropped' here ('delivered' sounds rather bloodless)
  - "Delivered" is quite common but don't mind changing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Do we know anything about the preparations Balmer undertook before commanding 467 Sqn? - presumably he had to pass though a heavy bomber conversion course (which normally involved conducting some minelaying sorties and participating in raids on relatively safe targets) as well as some kind of indoctrination in Bomber Command squadron leadership procedures
  - Yep, SOP but I don't think I have anything on it directly related to Balmer. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fair enough. His personnel file would probably have this, but it hasn't been digitalised yet. Nick-D (talk) 10:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Yes, forgot to mention earlier that I did search for his file while preparing the article but no dice, as you've found. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "From its new base at RAF Waddington" - I can't see where the old base is identified
  - Probably an oversight on my part, will see about it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "It was planned to be his last operation before going on to a more senior position" - do we know what position this was to be? Nick-D (talk) 12:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think this came up at GA and I have no more info than that unfortunately. Many tks for review/support! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support:
- One dab (Bougainville)[1] (action required).
- External links check out [2](no action required).
- Images all have alt text [3] (no action required).
- The Earwig Tool reveals no issues with copyright violation or close paraphrasing [4] (no action required).
- The Citation check tool reveals no errors (no action required).
- Overall this is an excellent article and I could find little to fault it after reading it three times. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 11:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Tks very much, mate -- appreciated. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- Why didn't he go into practising law? Any idea if he intended to after the war?
- Where did the nickname come from?
  - I wish I could answer these from my available references, as they're also the sort of things I like to know and explain, but no dice.
- Why 'B' course and not "B" course?
  - This is how it appears in the source but I've had people occasionally ce such instances to the standard WP double quotes -- I'm not that fussed either way...
- Refs: this'll come up if you're going to take it to FAC—make sure ally our refs either end with a fulls top or don't, at the minute you're inconsistent. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm assuming you mean the online refs -- with retrieval dates -- having full stops and the book citations not. While I'm not at this stage planning to take this to FAC, mainly because of a few gaps in personal details such as those you've noted above, the citation style is standard in every Featured Article I've done for yonks and has always been accepted. I've conjectured -- without having seen this written anywhere -- that citations are like image captions, i.e. brief phrases like author/title/page don't need full stops but more detailed online citations -- with retrieval dates, generated by the templates -- do. Tks for review! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support: well done as usual, Ian. I couldn't find anything to pick fault with. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Cheers, Rupert -- tks for stopping by. Ian Rose (talk) 12:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 04:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support with nitpicks.

No. 100 squadron or Squadron?
- God, how did that slip through -- tks!
What is "heavy weather"?
- Bad weather -- I can change it.
Why order the Herington sources as IV, then III? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I was sorting by volume title within author, but you make a good point -- with the series name in the title as well it should be III before IV. Tks again! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:10, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. 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.