Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/David Evans (RAAF officer)

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment
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 EyeSerenetalk 08:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

David Evans (RAAF officer)

edit
Nominator(s): Ian Rose (talk)


Recently promoted to GA, this article follows on naturally from James Rowland. Dave Evans was the third and last RAAF Chief of the Air Staff to have joined up in World War II, Rowland and Evans being separated in their tenures as CAS by Neville McNamara. Unlike his predecessors, Evans doesn't appear to have seen combat in WWII, but made up for it as CO of Australia's Canberra bomber squadron in Vietnam. Since then he's been outspoken in his opinions of how Australia should be defended, which makes him good copy... I apologise for the quality of the sole image of the chap, but lack of decent PD images is the price you pay for tackling personnel who came to the fore in the 60s and after... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Comments per standard disclaimer. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries. - Dank (push to talk)

  • I don't know what "personal standards" means in context.
  • "From 1990 to 2009 he was a board member and defence advisor to British Aerospace Australia (later BAE Systems Australia), and Chairman of the National Capital Authority from 1997 until 2003.": Seems nonparallel to me, but maybe it's okay. I'd move "from 1990 to 2009" to anywhere after the "was".
  • "If you are a small force to cannot afford to wait ...": ? - Dank (push to talk) 14:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actioned all suggestions -- tks for reviewing! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I handled this article's GA review, and think that it also meets the A class criteria. Nick-D (talk) 03:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I think I looked at this article once already, when it was up for B-class assessment. Some comments:

  1. Selwyn Evans, known by his middle name of David Why do you not call him David Evans?
    I think one has to acknowledge and cite what his first name was at birth, and then how he became known.
  2. David was educated to Intermediate Certificate level Consider linking Intermediate Certificate, as many people will not know what this was.
    I didn't know we had that link -- tks, will do.
  3. His Air Force career should have finished then and there Was he really that bad?
    Heh, I thought you'd like the directness of that wording -- no he wasn't bad, but as as a wartime inductee he was slated for demob at the end of hostilities, as I said.
  4. was transferred to No. 38 Squadron, going on to fly C-47 Dakota transports on a regular courier service to Japan Did he fly the Dakotas with No. 38, or another squadron?
    38 Sqn -- happy to try and reword if not clear.
  5. During this period he was commissioned as a pilot officer Any idea when?
    This is as good as it gets... ;-)
  6. he married Dorothy (Gail) Campbell, the daughter of a Merchant Navy captain You have captain linked to the wrong article here; I think it should be linked to Master mariner
    Roger wilco...
  7. From there he joined RAAF Squadron Berlin Air Lift—which comprised crews from Nos. 36 and 38 Squadrons and was based in Lubeck, West Germany—and flew over 250 sorties in Royal Air Force Dakotas during the Berlin Blockade Who flew 250 sorties, him or the detachment?
    Ah, I think grammatically it says what I mean, that he flew them. Without the paranthetic info between the emdashes it'd read From there he joined RAAF Squadron Berlin Air Lift and flew over 250 sorties, which seems clear to me.
  8. his services earned him the Air Force Cross Which services were these: the Berlin airlift, the VIP flight or as a flying instructor?
    VIP flight, will make more explicit.
  9. Aren't you passing over one of his more interesting jobs in the early 1960s? Didn't he evaluate the B-47?
    I didn't know that -- source?
    From Controversy to Cutting Edge. It's a book about the F-111. Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Yup, I know it, just haven't got round to reading it yet. I'm not planning to take this to FAC at this stage but if I do I'll make sure and check this out beforehand. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)e[reply]
  10. backdated to 13 March I understand why promotions are backdated, but why backdate a decoration?
    Your guess is as good as mine...
  11. I quite like the air-sea gap bit. The real point is that he realised that he could co-opt the RAN's maritime strategy as an argument for the primacy of the RAAF. The whole thing blew up in the Navy's faces when their carrier got cancelled.
    Yes, I think he (and most of the Air Force) was quite happy to see that happen...
  12. The seat was held by the sitting Labor member Jim Snow Most seats are held by the sitting member. I think you mean retained
    Well I meant held in the election but you're right, "retained" is better.
  13. If you are a small force you cannot afford to wait, and otherwise you will be defeated Um, can you double check that quote.
    Um, I think it's verbatim -- I know he didn't need the "and" before "otherwise" but it's in the source...
  14. I notice you keep alluding to his religion. You might consider saying something more explicit.
    It must be a slow day but I have to admit that one went way over... ;-) Thanks for reviewing! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:59, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. Another concise and interesting article with very little to fix. One thing that's bugging me, though, is the prolific use of year ranges separated by an endash in the prose. "From 2010 to 2011" is preferable to "during 2010–2011", but I question whether you need to give the date range at all—why not just give the date or year he was appointed to a particular position? Also, at ~2300 words, I wonder slightly if you're getting all the useful information the sources have to offer. It's certainly a well-developed article, and it doesn't seem to be obviously thin on the details anywhere, but, for comparison, "my" two articles on British CGSs are closer to the 4,000 word mark (though obviously quality trumps quality). I'm not an expert on Australian (or any) CASs, so I'd just ask if you think it's a good reflection of the body of published knowledge on the man. If you do, I'll defer to your judgement. Otherwise, no issues. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tks for that, HJ. Re. date ranges, I tend to do it to avoid too much "from/to", and also because just giving the start date of a longer posting may leave room for speculation about whether there was a whole 'nother position in between that and the next one mentioned -- but I'll have a look it. Re. quantity, heh, I've always been pretty succinct in my writing, going back to school essays -- truth to tell, I sometimes find writing a chore, but I do like having written something... ;-) That said, I think I've mined pretty well everything there is in those sources, particularly given only one (High Fliers) actually has a dedicated mini-bio on him, and comparing to other A-Class articles I've written I think it covers his life and career in sufficient detail. I wasn't planning to take to FAC in its current form, but once his autobiography becomes available I may use it to put more meat on and take to the next level. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:25, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I've read over this a couple of times and have only a few very minor comments:
    • no dabs, external links check out, images all have alt text and the citation check tool reveals no errors (no action required);
    • The Earwig tool reveals no issues with copyright violation or close paraphrasing (only wikipedia mirrors - see [1]) (no action required);
    • Spelling here I think - "that helped instill", specificially "instill" which I believe is AmEng, fairly sure AustEng is "instil"? At least my Macquarie Dictionary thinks so; and
    • Overall this is a fascinating article and is well written as usual. I was particularly happy to see you use Coulthard-Clark's official history of the RAAF in Vietnam which is an essential work for an article such as this IMO. The Vietnam War has always been of particular interest to me (mainly Australian Army involvement though), so it was really interesting to read about Evans' command of No. 2 Squadron during that conflict. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 22:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks AC. Re. "instil", if that's what the Mac Dic says then that's good enough for me...! Re. CC-C's history, yes, it's an essential reference for any bio on an RAAF bod involved in Vietnam -- I also used it for CASs Scherger and Hancock, the latter of which is currently at FAC if that's of inerest... ;-) We do seem to be extremely well served in the Oz MilHist community by the official and semi-official histories of the wars. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:00, 9 July 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/David_Evans_(RAAF_officer)&oldid=1075713897"