Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Lawrence Weathers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.

Article promoted by Biblioworm (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 19:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Lawrence Weathers[edit]

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

Lawrence Weathers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Lawrence Weathers was born in New Zealand of Australian parents, and his claim to fame is that during the Battle of Mont Saint-Quentin in 1918, with some assistance, he captured 180 German troops and three machine guns, and was subsequently awarded the Victoria Cross. He was killed a few days after the actions which resulted in the award, and never knew he was to receive it. This is the first VC I've brought to ACR, hoping it is up to the required standard. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support: nice article, Peacemaker. Interestingly (or not), I have lived on a street/place named for this soldier. Anyway, I have the following suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 03:55, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • the only image in the article appears to be appropriately licenced to me
  • "a son" or "the son"? Do we know if there were any siblings?
  • I went with "a son" as there was at least one elder one, who died at Gallipoli. No idea how many other siblings there were.
  • "...who suffering a gunshot wound to the leg on 10 June." --> "...who suffered..."
  • Fixed.
  • suggest spliting the paragraph after "he did not return to his unit until early December"
  • Done.
  • "During that battle, the battalion suffered 97 casualties": I wonder if the 43rd's role could be expanded here. From memory (it has been awhile since I wrote the Battle of Hamel article), it was assigned the role of capturing the village itself, which was the main objective of the attack. You wouldn't need to add too much more, but maybe expand the existing sentence just a little
  • Done.
  • suggest maybe splitting the paragraph after "Lance Corporal J. J. Weathers"
  • Done.
  • it might be worth noting that the Battle of St Quentin Canal was one of the last ground actions fought by the Australians of the war (the final stage of the battle around Montbrehain on 5 October was the last, I believe)
  • Done.
  • "NAA: B2455, WEATHERS LAWRENCE CARTHAGE" --> ""NAA: B2455, Weathers Lawrence Carthage" per MOS:ALLCAPS
  • Done.
  • Done.
  • Done.

Thanks for taking a look, Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:36, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:36, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the uncle's full name was John Joseph (although the AWM lists him as Wethers): [1]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:17, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did have a look, but I didn't go there, as it might be considered OR to determine who it was. If true, that would be weird, as John Joseph was Lawrence's father's name. Two sons with the same name is bizarre. Maybe someone stuffed the detail up at ADB? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries. Actually, I wonder if the similarities in names was just co-incidental and that "uncle" was just a battalion joke that might have been conflated over time. Based on the Roll of Honour, John Joseph Wethers is the only name that makes sense for soldiers killed that day from the same battalion: [2]. His service record can be found here and it indicates that the name is spelt correctly on the AWM: [3]. Anyway, that is all conjecture and OR. I guess it will just remain one of those minor mysteries. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • G'day Rupert. I had a look at the Roll of Honour circular, and it states JJ was actually Lawrence's "first cousin", but I still think it is OR to add that and thereby amend what the ADB says. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • If you're going to use that URAA tag, we need details of first publication of the image. (You don't actually need the URAA tag with that Australia tag). Nikkimaria (talk) 15:28, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Ian -- nice work, nothing to prevent me supporting...

  • Copyedited as usual so let me know any concerns; the only (minor) outstanding points are:
    • "They settled in rural parts of the state..." -- reads a little oddly to me as "rural parts" (plural) sounds like they moved a bit, which seems the antithesis of "settling"...
    • "In June he was re-allotted..." -- could this be reworded as "transferred"?
  • Not overly detailed but hardly surprising for a relatively short life.
  • Straightforward structure, and I'll take Nikki's image review as read.

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian, all done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:31, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

  • Formatting generally okay but:
    • Re. locations, I don't think you need bother with states, territories or countries for capitals or other major cities like Sydney, Canberra and Auckland.
    • I couldn't follow why the Australian War Memorial 2017 ref was suffixed with "a" when it's the only one to AWM.
  • No concerns reliability-wise.
  • Spotchecks not performed.

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just like to keep the locations consistent, taking into account that not all readers are Australian or Kiwis. Fixed the AWM footnotes. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:31, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  • I have reviewed this article and, not having identified any issues, am happy to support. Disclaimer: I edited the article, including some expansion work, back in 2013. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 08:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.