Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1974 White House helicopter incident/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ealdgyth via FACBot (talk) 28 March 2020 [1].

1974 White House helicopter incident

edit
Nominator(s): L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A strange incident in which a helicopter mechanic, Robert Preston, stole a helicopter and flew around Washington D.C., then back to Maryland, being pursued by police in helis and cars. He turned back towards D.C. and actually landed on the south lawn of the White House while under fire from the secret service. I got interested in this when reading about it in a monthly Air & Space magazine, then forgot about it for a while, until I saw it again on WP's Main Page in the OTD section. After a complete rewrite from Start-class, a good article review, and an A-class review, I think it is ready for FA. Thanks! L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review—pass

edit
  • Daily Collegian — this is a student newspaper, what makes it an RS?
  • Other sources look good. Formatting OK. Source checks not done due to nominator's history. buidhe 01:31, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm satisfied that the article is sufficiently complete to merit A-class, but the following sources (which I have access to and can send you if you like) have additional information:
    • "Soldier Lands a Stolen Copier on White House Lawn". The New York Times. Richard L. Madden Special to The New York Times. 18 February 1974. Retrieved 29 December 2019.
    • "Soldier Gets Year Term For Helicopter Incident". The New York Times. 30 August 1974.

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
    • Done.
  • File:Preston_helicopter.jpg: possible to say something more useful than "dunno" for date? Nikkimaria (talk) 19:23, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I really wish I could have a date, but I've done a lot of digging and the image has no exif data. If you feel it's really important I think the only thing I can do is email Air & Space and ask them. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:01, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Welp, I looked for about an hour and all I found was that 160219 is in the URL, so if I had to guess it would be February 19, 2016, but I really have no idea. You could always try to email Air and Space and see if they have any more information. Kees08 (Talk) 06:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've added that as the date: the url "04b_am2017_botzum160219" contains 04 and 2017, and the article is from the April 2017 magazine. The 160219 very strongly suggest that the image was taken on February 19, 2016. Not that it is really important, but that's settled. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:11, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild

edit
  • To my eye the lead seems unduly long relative to the length of the article. Optional: consider trimming it.
  • "On February 17, 1974, Army Private Robert K. Preston" As this is introducing the topic, it would be helpful to specify which army.
    • Says "US Army" now.
  • "Preston was returning to Tipton Field on leave south of Fort Meade where 30 Hueys were fueled and ready to fly" This doesn't really work to my eye. Perhaps two sentences? One describing Tipton Field's location and the aircraft there, and a second describibg Prestons actions?
    • Sounds better like this? "Shortly after midnight, Preston, on leave, was returning to Tipton Field, south of Fort Meade. Thirty helicopters at the base were fueled and ready to fly; he took off in one".
  • "This amounted to a six-month sentence, since he had already been in prison for six months at the time." This does not seem to be factually correct. Do you mean something like 'This meant that Preston had to serve an additional six months, since he... '?
    • Clearer like this: "The duration of his court-martial was given to him as time served; this resulted in a further six months in prison"?
  • The source you cite does not seem to support "downhearted due to ... his lack of success in his military career".
    • The source, Air & Space, says: "the 20-year-old private, despondent over his muddied future and a failed relationship, was on his way back..."
Yes, I did check it. The quote mentions "a failed relationship" - fine - and "his muddied future". The article addresses his past "lack of success in his military career".
  • Replaced with "unclear future in his military career".
Hmm. OK. Close enough I suppose.
  • "He caused one police car to crash with a head-on pass just a few inches above its roof" Suggest 'He caused one police car to crash by executing a head-on pass just a few inches above its roof'.
    • Good idea.
  • "then followed the Baltimore–Washington Parkway once again towards Washington, planning to surrender personally to U.S. President Richard Nixon. Preston flew back towards Washington" The second phrase in italics seems redundant.
    • Cut that part out.
  • "Shots hit Preston's foot, but he was able to regain control" "regain control" - it hasn't been stated nor suggested that he lost control.
    • Expanded on this.
  • "for overnight treatment" I am not sure about "overnight". Perhaps delete, or perhaps 'for treatment, and stayed there overnight'?
    • Removed.
  • "his resulted in a further six months in prison. He eventually served two months of hard labor at Fort Riley, Kansas before being granted a general discharge" I am confused. Was the two months in addition to or instead of the 6/12 months previously mentioned?
    • That was instead; I've replace "eventually" with "instead".
  • "The Secret Service increased the restricted airspace around the White House." It may be clearer to say 'The Secret Service increased the size of the restricted airspace around the White House.', if that is what is meant.
    • Done.

Overall, a nice piece of work. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That all looks good. Just the query over the interpretation of the source left. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looks good to me. Supporting.
Nb, it is my intention to use this review to claim points in the WikiCup. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:11, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

edit
  • On February 17, 1974, U.S. Army Private Robert K. Preston stole Link private and the US Army.
  • Link Fort Meade?
  • climbed into one of the helicopters, serial number 62–1920 The infobox uses an en dash while this sentence uses a minus hyphen.
  • Remove the citation in the infobox because it's already mentioned in the body.
  • South Lawn, 300 feet (91 m) from the mansion.[2][5][6][7][3] Re-oder the refs here.
  • Pipe President to the US President.
  • He died of cancer on July 21, 2009, while living in Ephrata, Washington What kind of cancer?
    • Source doesn't say, and I don't think it particularly relevant to the incident as whole.

That's it I think. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Epicgenius

edit

Hello, I will leave some comments. I plan to claim WikiCup points for this review.

  • two police Bell 206 JetRanger helicopters - shouldn't "police" be before "helicopters"?
    • Good catch.
  • United States Secret Service should be in the lead as well.
    • Done.
  • This meant he had to serve six additional months, since he had already been in prison for six months at the time. - I suppose this can be flipped around: "Since he had already been in prison for six months at the time, he only had to serve six additional months."
    • Done.
  • "Towards" is used in the lead but "toward" in the Background section. It should be consistent.
    • That was a typo.
  • Preston left a dance hall and restaurant downhearted - I feel like there should be a comma after "restaurant".
    • Done.
  • It would make me feel better because I love flying". - since this is a complete sentence, the period should be before the quote. The page already has a comma before a quotation mark - in the same sentence actually - so this should be changed for consistency.
    • Nice catch.
  • Secret Service policy at the time was to fire at aerial intruders, but when and how to do so was vague - this also reads strangely to me, specifically "when and how to do so was vague". There should be a better way of wording this.
    • Removed "when and".
  • Washington National Airport (now known as "Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport") - genuine question, do we really need the parenthetical note? It doesn't seem important to the narrative.
    • It's in the link so I don't think it is important.

I have to go somewhere but will continue these comments later. So far, it looks good, even if a bit short. epicgenius (talk) 15:22, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here are my remaining comments:

  • car-top level - the roofs of the cars?
    • Yes.
  • At the time of the incident, President Richard Nixon was traveling in Florida, and First Lady Pat Nixon was in Indianapolis, visiting their sick daughter, Julie.[8] - This paragraph is only one sentence. Usually these should be combined with longer paragraphs unless there's a good reason.
    • Merged with previous para.
  • It was evaluated by army personnel and found to be flightworthy despite its many bullet holes, and it lifted off in front of cameras from many major TV networks and reporters shortly before noon. It was extensively photographed as part of the investigation, then was repaired and returned to service. It was later put on display at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Willow Grove.[2] - I suggest replacing some instances of "it" with "the helicopter", otherwise the wording gets repetitive.
    • Done.
  • equivalent to $518.42 in 2019, equivalent to $12,442 in 2019 - Generally a source is needed for stuff like this, but you can use inflation-fn in this case.
    • Done.
  • Can you link time served?
    • Done.
  • this resulted in a further six months in prison - should be rephrased. Because of his time served, he only had six months remaining in his sentence. The current wording implies that six months was appended to the 1-year sentence, which isn't the case.
  • The Secret Service increased the size of the restricted airspace around the White House - from what size to what size? Only if you feel this is important, but the previous size of the restricted airspace may be interesting.
    • I do feel it is important, but I can't find a source right now.
  • Citation 4, Public Report of the White House security review, Federation of American Scientists. Archived December 2, 2006, at WebCite needs a {{cite web}} or other CS2 template for consistency with other refs.
    • Done.

These are all my comments. Otherwise this looks good. epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support by PM

edit

I went through this article in detail at Milhist ACR and have reviewed the changes since. I consider it meets the FA criteria. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Kees08

edit

I have read through this a couple times for curiosity's sake, happy to see it here. Have not seen any glaring issues and will give it a full review shortly. Placeholder in case I forget so someone can ping me. Kees08 (Talk) 18:31, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kees08: - L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

  • Currently using two author name formats (last, first; first last) in the references; consolidate to one
    • changed all to last, first
  • If I squint my eyes I think I see an author for "Soldier Lands Stolen Copter on White House Lawn" in the screenshot of the newspaper. I can check it and others through my free local library if you do not have a way. So this is a general comment that all references with authors should have authors
    • I would be really nice if you could do this for me, maybe my computer screen is too small, but I can't see any author. I've checked all the other news cite websites; all but the NYT have extra high resolution but I can't see any authors. Is there a standard place to look for the article author that isn't in the news piece itself?
      • Added (and the others were AP so added those). I can get on NYT easy enough, I just have to enter my library card number, go through a little tutorial thing, and it is valid for one day at a time. No worries, this point is resolved. Kees08 (Talk) 05:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Using webarchive within cite web makes the output different; suggest using archive-url, archive-date, and url-status parameters instead
    • Done, standardized.
  • I would add via=Google News to the Kentucky New Era citation
    • Done.
  • Is the external link the same as the Federation of American Scientists link?
  • Assassinations, Threats, and the American Presidency: From Andrew Jackson to Barack Obama seems like a good RS to include. You might have to ask at the resource request, Google Books only has one page in the area available.
    • Judging by the top and bottom the page, it seems to be the only page related to Preston.
    • In that short section it says that it is believed Preston inspired Byck. Byck's article says the same thing. Is that something that warrants inclusion in your opinion?
      • Yes, I've added a short mention.
  • My Extraordinary Journey with Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford also has a mention. Have you done a source search for books? I was surprised to see no books in the sources, I figured RS's had written about the incident and from a cursory look it seems like they have. My other concern was that most of the sources are contemporary and at least some could possibly be replaced with newer book sources.
    • I did some research on google books, but most of the works I've found only include passing 1-paragraph mentions. From what I've seen, they don't contradict the contemporary sources, most of which are more detailed. However, I understand that at least some sources should be new, so I've included the two books you've suggested. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:36, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear on the book point, I doubt you will find new information on the incident and I do not think it will be a big deal. Just want to make sure we included recent RS's if available. From WP:FASOURCE Are the main sources reasonably up-to-date, and therefore likely to represent the most recent scholarship? Older sources, particularly contemporaneous primary sources, are often appropriate, but the nominator may need to explain why they've been chosen. (which although an essay, provides good advice). I think the article is in very good shape overall. Kees08 (Talk) 21:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Content

  • The dollar sign is usually not wikilinked (looks like once in the intro and once in the body right now)
  • Your choice to rephrase stole a Bell UH-1B Iroquois helicopter (commonly known as a "Huey") from to stole a Bell UH-1B Iroquois "Huey" helicopter from
    • Yeah, done.
  • Could go without 'only' here he only had to serve six additional months.
    • Okay.
  • Is there any more information? I assume it was a private pilot's license flying airplanes, but a teeny bit of additional information here, if available, would help the article IMO He earned a pilot's license
    • Changed to "private pilot's license for single-engine, fixed-wing aircraft", from the NYT.
  • Could go without the United States Army Airfield wl to avoid two back-to-back; it just goes to a list of airfields of which Tipton is one
    • Good catch.
  • It sounds like in the prose that he served hard labor instead of six more months; in the intro it sounds like he served six months
    • This is a bit of a contradiction, because the Kentucky New Era, also claims Preston was originally sentenced to six months of hard labor, where all the other available sources say six months of jail. If that's okay with you, I've removed the "hard labor" mention entirely.
      • Sounds fine, might want to adjust the intro to match what happened. Kees08 (Talk) 20:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ajust how? The lead doesn't say he did forced labor, it doesn't go into the specifics of his trial and sentence. L293D (☎ • ✎) 20:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • The lead says Since he had already been in prison for six months at the time, he had to serve six additional months. After his release,. Which is twelve months total. The prose says The duration of his court-martial was given to him as time served; this meant he had to serve a further six months in prison.[11] He instead served two months at Fort Riley, which is eight months total. Kees08 (Talk) 21:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
            • The lead says he was sentenced to serve six more months, the body goes into more detail and explains that he actually only served two. In the US, you almost never serve the full duration a prison sentence, there's all sorts of appeals and paroles, so it's fairly standard for the sentence to be way different from what the dude actually served. I can go into more specifics in the lead if you feel it would be useful to the reader. L293D (☎ • ✎) 22:14, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
              • I'll leave it to you as to which is better. It could go either way so not a big deal. I think I remember another editor commenting on length of the intro so I get keeping it concise. Kees08 (Talk) 22:22, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This might be a good 'see also' link List of White House security breaches
    • Sure, that works.

I think that's all for now. Kees08 (Talk) 20:16, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting now, there are no dedicated books on the incident and the ones that have a bit more detail in them are included in the article. Source formatting is good, images are the best available, seems well-written and provides the complete story without going into too much detail. Might want to address the one note I just added about the intro but that is it. Kees08 (Talk) 20:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments support by Pendright

edit

Next in the queue! Pendright (talk) 00:58, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pendright: does that mean it's the next one to be promoted? I'm still somewhat unfamiliar with the FAC process. L293D (☎ • ✎) 19:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is intended to mean that I’m next in line to review the article once the previous review is completed. Now that it is, I’ll start my review. Thanks for asking! Pendright (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

  • The U.S. is spelled out with its first use
  • Done.
<>A further review of MOS indicates that common abbreviations need not be expanded even on first use. I withdraw the comment and add my apology!
  • Most English dictionaries do not define the word stole in the context in which it is used here. Consider a substitute word that means what you intend.
  • Changed to "Preston took off in a Bell UH-1B Iroquois "Huey" helicopter".
<>How about - Preston took off in a [stolen] Bell UH-1B Iroquois "Huey" helicopter?
Sure, that works for me. - L293D
  • Was he a private or a private first class?
  • I want to keep the first sentence clear and concise. His specific rank is stated in the body. He was a private first class.
<>I can appreciate your desire to keep it clear and concise, but your lead is supposed to be the summary of the body of the article. So if he is a PFC in the body, logically, he is a PFC in the lead. I’m sure you’ll agree that consistency is important in article writing as well as for the Wikipedia readers.
Sure, changed. - L293D
  • ... but he did not graduate from the helicopter training course and lost his opportunity to attain the rank of warrant officer pilot.
Link warrant officer
  • Done.
  • ... and he was sent to Fort Meade as a helicopter mechanic.
Link Fort Meade here and unlink in the next paragraph
  • Done.
  • He then flew back towards Fort Meade pursued by two Bell 206 JetRanger police helicopters and police cars.
  • Add a semicolon after Fort Meade to join the two independent clauses.
  • Do you really think that a semicolon is needed? I've changed it to a comma for now, I feel it's more appropriate.
<>The sentence does have two independent clauses. So, according to rule, a comma and a coordinating conjunction, such as and, or a semicolon can join two independent clause
Well, I reworded it so I didn't have to write it weirdly like this. - L293D
  • FYI - Towards and toward mean the same, but toward is the preferred spelling in American English.
  • Okay, changed now.
  • After a chase over Maryland, he reversed course towards Washington again and entered the White House grounds.
Did he actually enter the grounds in the way we generally understand the word enter?
  • Yes, I'm pretty sure he entered the grounds in the way we generally would think a person in a helicopter would.
  • In a plea bargain at his court-martial, Preston pled guilty to "wrongful appropriation and breach of the peace", was sentenced to one year in prison, and was fined US$2,400 (equivalent to $12,442 in 2019).
  • Replace "In a plea" with In the plea - it's specific!
  • Sure.
  • Add and after the second comma before was - when a comma separates two independent clauses it must be accompanied by a coordinating conjunction such as and.
  • Reworded, do you feel is it well written like this, or should I separate the sentence into two.
<>It's a long sentence, but it does flow well. I would consider changing fine to fined because sentenced is past tense.
The word fine is used as a noun. I don't see why writing "he was sentenced to a fined of $2,400" would be better. - L293D
  • Deleting the last comma after prison will state his entire sentencing without interuption.
  • Done.
  • (equivalent to $12,442 in 2019) - Are these equivalents (here and in the body) reported by the source, or was a U.S. Inflation Rate Calculator used?
  • A automatic conversion template is used, the conversion is the same in the lead and body.
<>Great, sorry I missed the conversion!
  • Preston received a general discharge from the army,
Link general discharge
  • Done.

Background:

  • After enrolling in the U.S. Army in 1972, he trained to become a helicopter pilot, flying a Hughes TH-55 Osage at Fort Wolters, Texas.
  • Enlisting is the common nominclature used when volunteeing for a military service.
  • Already done by someone else.
  • After flying, change the indefinte article to the definite article.
  • Okay.
  • He enrolled in the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program at Rutherford High School
One of your sources says he also - "studied aviation management at Gulf Coast Community College." Is this worth adding?

Incident:

  • I don't think so, I haven't seen that in other sources so I have doubts about the accuracy of that statement.
<>You'll find it under your Reference note 2, the first web link.
Good point, I've added it to the article. - L293D
  • On February 17, 1974, shortly after midnight, Preston left a dance hall and restaurant, downhearted due to a failed relationship and his unclear future in his military career.
Given the incident that followd, I suspect Preston was more likely to have been angry or irate, rather than downhearted? Does the source describe his emotinal state at the time?
  • Air & Space, my best source, says "despondent over his muddied future and a failed relationship"
<>Fair enough!
  • He returned to United States Army Airfield Tipton Field south of Fort Meade, where thirty Bell UH-1 Huey helicopters were fueled and ready.
  • Wouldn't "He returned to Tripton Field" say the same thing in a more direct way?
  • I've cut out "United States", but I do feel it's important for the reader to know exactly what Tipton field was, given that it became an airport later.
<>Fair enough!
  • Place a comma after field - this phrase is not essential to the meaning of the sentence.
  • Sure.
  • ... and started pre-flight checks.
Preflight is one word
  • There's some disagreement in dictionaries over this one, but fine.
  • Preston flew low over the restaurant he had visited earlier, then briefly touched down in a nearby field, where his hat was later recovered.
why the comma after field?
  • Removed.
  • [The] Secret Service policy[,] at the time[,] was to fire at aerial intruders, but when ...
Add items in brackets [ ]
  • Okay
  • The helicopter was suddenly illuminated by [the] floodlights, and [the] Secret Service agents opened fire with automatic weapons and shotguns.
Add items in brackets [ ]
  • I kinda disagree on this one. Why that so many "the"s? The floodlights were not mentioned previously.
<>The definite article (the) is used before singular and plural nouns when the noun is specific or particular. I suppose one could argue about the first definite article, but the second one leaves no doubt about its appropriateness.

Aftermath:

Sure, I've added a the in the second case. - L293D
  • It is believed that Preston's actions influenced Samuel Byck to attempt to hijack a plane five days later, carrying a .22 cal revolver and a gasoline bomb.
Spell out caliber
  • Sounds fair.
  • His lawyers arranged a plea bargain in which all civil charges would be dropped if the case was transferred to the military.
Change was to were

Pendright (talk) 19:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve finished reviewing your responses to my original comments. You’ve covered most of them already, but there are a few left. Thanks for being so prompt. Pendright (talk) 08:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All of my comments have had a response - supporting! Pendright (talk) 05:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: Is this ready to be promoted, or is some more support necessary? L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/1974_White_House_helicopter_incident/archive1&oldid=947875150"