Talk:John T. Hayward

Untitled

Not sure that I'd bother quoting medal citations that weren't combat or Manhattan Project related. At his pay grade, Legions of Merit and the like are common end of tour awards.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John T. Hayward/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 18:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

• Minor bits:
• "As former batboy for the New York Yankees," - is there only one batboy per team? If not, I'd suggest "a former batboy" would sound more natural.
  •  Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• "the Bomb damage" - is the capitalisation right? (NB: it may be a nuance in the atomic literature; it's lower case later though)
  •  Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• "As a boy, he was a batboy" - If you went for "As a youth, he was a batboy" you'd avoid the repetition.
  •  Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• "bosun" - might be worth linking.
  •  Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• "Pacific Theater" - the citations. Probably just my personal style (so treat as a personal opinion, not as a GA review requirement) but I wondered if these would read better if converted into regular narrative (i.e. describe what he did as events, using the citation as a reference, rather than just quoting the citations). Just a thought.
  •  Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• " Defense expenditure on research and development grew from $525 million to $4 billion" - it would be worth giving the modern equivalents here (I can help if nec.)
  •  Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

• Clear. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

Clear.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

Looks fine at this stage. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

(c) it contains no original research.

None spotted.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

All good.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

All good.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

Neutral. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Stable. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Contradictory

This article states he flew the first "Little Boy pumpkin bomb" aboard a Neptune off a carrier. Pumpkin bombs (if you believe the wiki article linked from this page) were dummy Fat Man bombs - a "Little Boy pumpkin bomb" would thus appear to be a contradiction in terms. Unless verified that inert Little Boy bombs were also called pumpkin bombs with some suitable reference, this should probably be reworded as inert Little Boy bomb, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.13 (talk) 12:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

For a start, there already is a suitable reference in the article, Hayward & Borklund 2000, p. 183. If you'd checked it, you would have found the reference to a Little Boy pumpkin. Here is a picture of one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)