Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Paterson Clarence Hughes

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 Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 03:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Paterson Clarence Hughes[edit]

Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk)

Featured article candidates/Paterson Clarence Hughes/archive1

Another Australian fighter ace, this time our highest scorer in the Battle of Britain, Pat Hughes. Given his seventeen victories in less than two months during the battle, one can only wonder if, had he lived, he would've challenged Clive Caldwell as Australia's leading ace of the war. Beyond the air fighting, though, this is a bit of a love story, as Hughes' English bride Kay figures prominently in the main sources. Thanks Cliftonian for his recent GA review, and in advance to everyone who comments here! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from GA reviewer: looks like I was right about why he transferred to the UK. Takes one to know one I suppose ;) — Cliftonian (talk) 16:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support: oops, forgot this. Well done again Ian. — Cliftonian (talk) 05:04, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again, John! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support: fantastic article, Ian, I couldn't find anything to pick fault with. I believe that the images are all appropriately licenced, the article is well-written, comprehensive, and well referenced. Well done and thank you for helping to improve my own knowledge on Australia's contribution to the Battle of Britain. I read this for B-class review, and it got me then, as it does now. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated, Rupert! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support
- No dab links (no action req'd).
- No issues with external links (no action req'd).
- All the images have alt text (no action req'd).
- Images are PD and appear to have the req'd info (no action req'd).
- Captions look fine (no action req'd).
- The Citation Check Tool reveals no issues with ref consolidation (no action req'd).
- In the lead: "..and, later, Bristol Blenheim fighters..." Is it correct to call the Blenheim a fighter? I'd of thought it was a light bomber or some such. (suggestion only - I admit I'm unclear on what role they were used in and at what time, perhaps they were both at various stages or in different roles by different squadrons?)
  - The Blenheim was conceived as a light bomber but when introduced before the war it could outpace many fighters and some fighter versions were made. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- "...his father was by now working as a labourer..." perhaps instead "...his father was by then working as a labourer..." (suggestion only)
  - Sure. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- What are "spots before the eyes" - I'm assuming its some kind of medical condition / visual disturbance, but it might be good to wikilink it if an appropriate article exists so as to explain it to readers (suggestion only).
  - Australia's Few suggests it was the beginning of battle fatigue but since there doesn't seem to have been any contemporary diagnosis I thought it best to just stick to the symptoms he seems to have reported at the time. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I made a minor tweak to alphabetically sort the reflist [1], otherwise this article looks very good to me. Anotherclown (talk) 04:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Tks for that and all your comments, AC! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2015 (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.