Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Erwin Böhme

< 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.

No consensus to promote at this time - Iazyges (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 06:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Erwin Böhme

edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Georgejdorner (talk)

Erwin Böhme (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because Erwin Böhme was an early flying ace who won the Blue Max. A close friend of his mentor Oswald Boelcke, he inadvertently caused Boelke's death. Despite this tragedy, he became a 24-victory ace, and rose to become a squadron leader under the Red Baron before being killed in action.Georgejdorner (talk) 21:27, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by from CPA

edit
On my laptop I can see the image File:Holzminden_weserufer.jpg sandwiching tekst with the infobox. The second sandwich is between the File:Nieuport_12_(replica)_AN1543487.jpg's margin and File:Albatros_D.I.jpg which technally sandwich it. Another examples of images' margin is with File:Airco_DH.2.jpg and File:Royal_Aircraft_Factory_F.E.8_in_flight.jpg and with File:A.W._F.K.8_(Cockpit_area).jpg and File:Captured_Albatros_DVa_at_Armentieres_1917.jpg. All of these examples should be adressed. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On my desktop computer, no sandwiching appears, which tells me your smaller screen size is causing your sandwiching. I made changes based on that assumption.
I moved the photo of Holtzminden downwards, away from the info box. I also lowered the railroad tracks photo.
The photos of the Nieuport and the Albatros D.I are in different paragraphs, so I cannot see how they would sandwich. Likewise with the DH.2 photo and that of the FE.8.
I also lowered the photo of the Albatros D.Va.
When I shrink my screen to laptop size (about 13 inches), I find no sandwiching.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:22, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks much better now. The sandwich issues are now removed. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggested improvement.Georgejdorner (talk) 16:34, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will have a full review this weekend. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:45, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

edit

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:12, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

edit

All probably okay. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:12, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HF - weak support

edit

I'll try to take a look at this. Ping me if I haven't started in three or four days. Hog Farm Talk 04:06, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • "He constructed the Usambara Railway to export raw cedar timber to" --> He supervised construction of the Usambara Railway ... to make it clearer what exactly his role was here
    • Done.08:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Specify in the body that the timber plantation was in Tanganyika as well.
  • "Later in March, Böhme began his combat career in the west by engaging Farmans and a Nieuport from the French Service Aéronautique" - but hadn't he already submitted reports for aerial victories in 1915 with Kampstaffel 10, with the Kampstaffel centered on a city where the link goes to a place in France?
    • Indeed, he submitted three combat claims against the French; two of those were unconfirmed, thus no victory. The third is a strange and very rare case--a confirmed victory not on a pilot's victory list.Georgejdorner (talk) 09:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On 2 August 1916, Böhme scored his first accredited aerial victory, downing a Russian Nieuport 12 over Radzyse." - last we heard of his fighting, he was out west by Verdun. When did he get shipped out to the eastern front?
  • " a mature and worldly best friend" - "mature and worldly" may be a bit florid for an encyclopedia
    • Echoes of source material.
    • Consider, Boelcke's life experience was secondary school and the military. During Böhme's extra decade of life, he had earned an engineer's degree, vagabonded about Europe, worked in Africa, then came to the military.Georgejdorner (talk) 09:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Böhme joined his new unit on 8 September 1916, after a month in transit." - where was this unit stationed?
  • "fled the hullabaloo of the squadron mess" - again, not sure that "hullabaloo" is a great encyclopedic word
  • "cut the tendon to his trigger finger." - trigger finger is linking to a medical condition. Is this intentional?
  • "In 1921, Annamarie's purloined letter to Erwin Böhme was returned to her from England" - I'd gotten the impression that the article was referring to the letter Erwin had written to Annamarie and then pocketed before being shot down. I think the identity of the letter being referred to in different places could be cleared up a bit
  • "2nd Lt. KIA; 2nd Lt. Ronald Wood wounded in action/prisoner of war" - do we not know the identity of the KIA 2nd Lt.?

Hog Farm Talk 02:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just one more thing. I'm getting hung up on the sentence Later in March, Böhme began his combat career in the west by engaging Farmans and a Nieuport from the French Service Aéronautique. It just seems odd to be stating that he began his combat career in the west when he'd already submitted three claims in the west. Hog Farm Talk 19:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am also hung up on that series of events, and am researching it. The confirmed but unlisted victory is perhaps only the third example I've ever seen, and is quite a puzzler. Please allow me a bit more time to work on it.Georgejdorner (talk) 22:53, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have rewritten the bit about the Farmans and the Nieuport. I have also added a bit to the Victory list. To me, that seems to clarify the problem, but then I may be text-blind at this point.Georgejdorner (talk) 23:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think this can be resolved by removing the phrase about beginning his combat career in the west, since the unaccredited victory would have already been the beginning of his combat career in the west. Hog Farm Talk 00:41, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thought I had already gotten that. Gone now.Georgejdorner (talk) 02:29, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're okay with this change, I think that resolves things for me. Hog Farm Talk 19:42, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That works.Georgejdorner (talk) 16:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Noting for the benefits of the coordinators that my support is a weaker one, given Harrias' and Gog's concerns about tone below, which I would probably echo at FAC. There's a certain detached nature that's needed for a featured article that isn't present here. Hog Farm Talk 17:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild

edit
  • "Although haunted by guilt, Böhme carried on". He was in the military. Did he have a choice?
Fair enough. The lead is meant to be a summary of the article, and I can't find anything about this in the article.
"...the feeling he was responsible for killing his best friend would haunt him for the rest of his life."
I think you're stretching, but ok.
Er, how? And giving his time for an individual race in his youth which has nothing to do with his notability is undue detail IMO.
Winning the swimming race establishes him as a champion swimmer. On second thought, giving the winning time is a bit gratuitous.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:57, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No in doesn't. It states "serving in a Garde-Jäger Regiment (Guards Infantry Regiment) in 1899". This could mean eg that he served for a single month in 1899.
And the Military Service Law of 1888, as amended in 1893, provided for two years' military service, with a lot of exemptions; one year seems a little odd. Similarly service usually started after the harvest and ended with the annual manoeuvres; serving Jan-Dec is possible, but again seems odd.
Every thing you state is reasonable and rational and not in the source.Georgejdorner (talk) 06:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so long as you are sure that you are reflecting the source. But, if the source clearly states that he served for 12 months you need to amend the article to make this unambiguous; if it doesn't, you need to amend the lead.
Done.Georgejdorner (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As written it seems a bit hand wavey. You seem to be saying that it was reported - by some unknown person or body - as "confirmed", but wasn't actually confirmed. [?] What does the source actually say?
"Flying with Kasta 10 on the Eastern Front it is reported he shot down three enemy planes in the East but only one was confirmed (2 August 1915), although it is not generally included in his list of victories." Above the Lines, p. 78.Georgejdorner (talk) 06:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How about something like 'he shot down three aircraft, one of which was confirmed though sources do not include it in his official victory list'?
Done. Scroll down five items for details.Georgejdorner (talk) 08:25, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And, in my experience, victory reporting/confirmation on the Russian Front was always hand-wavy.Georgejdorner (talk) 09:03, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid single sentence paragraphs.
Supplied second sentence for filler.Georgejdorner (talk) 09:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On 2 August 1916, Böhme scored his first accredited aerial victory, downing a Russian Nieuport 12 over Radzyse. After an extended fight, Böhme killed Franco-Latvian ace Eduard Pulpe." If these two sentences refer to the same event, perhaps link them with a semi colon.
  • "Even as Boelcke scored his final run of 21 aerial victories during September and October 1916, Böhme shot down four more British airplanes." I am struggling to work out what this is trying to communicate.
Much better, although, sadly, "wingman" now runs into MOS:NOFORCELINK: "Do use a link wherever appropriate, but as far as possible do not force a reader to use that link to understand the sentence. The text needs to make sense to readers who cannot follow links."
Given that 'wingman' is in the common vocabulary, the link is not truly needed to understand the term. The link is informative on the subject. Would you opt for deleting it?Georgejdorner (talk) 06:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Wingman is, IMHO, absolutely not a specialist term. It is a piece of specialist jargon. Entirely appropriate for the article, but it need explaining. Off the top of my head and without sources 'Fighter pilots usually flew in pairs, with one leading attackswingman flying close behind and to one side to protect his leader from attacks from the rear.' (This sort of thing happens all the time - I have a set of stock explanations for the areas I habitually improve articles in. (Eg "stuck his colours"!))
Congratulations, you have rendered Webster's definition nearly word perfect. 'Wingman' is American usage. Still, my query stands: Would you delete the link?
I did? Brownie points for me then. No, you need the link for MOS:UL "An article is said to be underlinked if words are not linked and are needed to aid understanding of the article." (Note "aid".) But you need an in line explanation for MOS:NOFORCELINK: "Do use a link wherever appropriate, but as far as possible do not force a reader to use that link to understand the sentence. The text needs to make sense to readers who cannot follow links."
I have just looked up wingman on the online Websters. The informal US usage is interesting; handy word.
  • "On the evening of 27 October 1916, a warweary Boelcke fled the hullabaloo of the squadron mess for the quiet of his own bedroom. Böhme joined him there. The two men talked deep into the night, until Boelcke's batman hinted at bedtime to end the conversation." This seems a deep level of trivia and not WP:SS. Suggest deleting the lot.
Please reread the words I have actually quoted. Where do I object to you mentioning the 6 patrols or Boelcke's death? (And Böhme did not "kill" Boelcke.) Rereading the words I am actually querying I fail to see how "protagonist goes to his bedroom, talks with a friend, gets to bed late" is not trivia.
You fail to see that two combat pilots went short of sleep the night before they flew combat. Pilot fatigue may seem trivial to you, but I take a contrary opinion.Georgejdorner (talk) 06:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the source explicitly states that fatigue was or may have been a factor then by all means use WP:SS to say something like 'On the night of 27/28 October 1916, Boelcke and Böhme got little sleep and the resultant fatigue may have been a factor in events the following day.'
So if fatigue is explicitly mentioned it's encyclopedic, and if it's implicit it's trivial? That's a Philadelphia lawyer's argument.
This sentence is not only not trivial, it's transitional between days.Georgejdorner (talk) 08:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not deleting this sentence.Georgejdorner (talk) 09:06, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your call. If you are claiming that Boelcke and Böhme were both culpable in the former's death by negligently not getting sufficient sleep and then flying while fatigued without explicit source support I won't be able to support it.
What does "within" mean? I understand "behind" or "between", but does "within" mean the plane actually landed in a trench? Or within the Allied frontline trench system? Or what?
No specifics given. Subbed one ambiguity for another in effort to please reviewer.Georgejdorner (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see no ambiguity in the current pharasing.
As a keen rugby fan and ex-player I can't recall ever hearing this applied to the sport. Which is besides the point. A reader should not need to know the specialist jargon of a sport (which they may barely have heard of) to make sense of an article.
Websters defines the term; Oxford does not. Looks like a clash between usages. At any rate, I am here to inform the reader rather than baffle the Brits. Changes made.Georgejdorner (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent attitude, it will hold you in good stead.
K.F. Koehler
Many thanks.

Good work. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More in a bit. Thank you for the review.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done for now.Georgejdorner (talk) 07:48, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking pretty good. Feel free to come back at me over any of my comments of suggestions you are not happy with. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some responses above, plus:

Plus, entirely optionally, if you fancy some "revenge", I have a brand new article (currently at User:Gog the Mild/Battle of Winwick) which will be going to GAN in the next day or two. (And then to FAC.) Would you like first refusal on reviewing it at GAN? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC) Gog the Mild (talk) 13:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is now at GAN. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. If pressed I will oppose on the basis of the two issues above. If both were satisfactorily addressed I would grit my teeth and support as just barely creeping over the A-class threshold and to encourage a first-timer; see Harris's comments and summary below as to where and how else it falls short. A lot of good work has been done here and there are the solid bones of a decent article. But the nominator is reluctant to make changes to improve it further so that it meets the A class criteria and the MoS. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Harrias

edit

Right, let's take a look at this.

  • Provide a conversion into miles for three-kilometer race.
  • "However, upon landing in the midst of war breaking out, he reported to his old infantry regiment, despite turning 35 at month's end. Erwin Böhme promptly volunteered for aviation duty." I don't like the short sentence at the end, and think this would be better all rolled into one, longer sentence.
  • "..one claim for 2 August 1915 was reportedly confirmed.." Reported by who? If we have a source, it would be better attributed: eg. "..according to xyz the claim for 2 August 1915 was confirmed.."
  • "Shortly thereafter, Oswald Boelcke dropped in to visit his brother, flying a Fokker bearing combat damage." I'm not sure what this adds to our understanding of Böhme, and would recommend removing it.
  • "leutnant" should be coded as German-language text.
  • "Kampstaffel 10 shifted theaters in June 1916, transferring from France to Kovel, Russia. This posting would lead to his transfer to fighter aviation." Avoid single-sentence paragraphs, blend this in with the subsequent paragraph.
  • "After the brothers conferred.." I would favour "After conferring with his brother.."
  • "hullabaloo" is informal language rather than encyclopaedic language, switch it for an alternative.
  • "On the evening of 27 October 1916, a war-weary Boelcke fled the hullabaloo of the squadron mess for the quiet of his own bedroom. Böhme joined him there. The two men talked deep into the night, until Boelcke's batman hinted at bedtime to end the conversation." This paragraph seems unnecessary. The strength of the friendship between Böhme and Boelcke has been well established in the previous section, this is just unnecessary filler.
  • "The collision appeared minor, but was mortal." Probably just personal preference, but I think "fatal" would work better than "mortal" here.
  • "..he would not recall.." should probably be "..he could not recall.." unless the sources states it was an intentional refusal, rather than an inability.
  • "Even though he could not recall his own accident.." To avoid repetition, try "Even though he did not remember his own accident.."
  • "As the leading ace of the war, he was a national hero, lionized by generals and nobility as well as the public. His death shocked both the German public and military." Honestly, these two sentences more or less say the same thing, and don't both need to be there.
  • "E.M. Roberts" Per the MOS, space the initials: E. M.
  • Does "Hart (2005), p. 355." directly support the claim that April was "the most momentous month of aerial combat of the war"?
  • What are "end runs"?
  • "..traveled back to Berlin to lobby for his squadron." What was he lobbying for? Better pay, conditions, or was he lobbying to keep his squadron? Too ambiguous as written.
  • No need for the Easter egg link to Werner Voss#Final patrol, the direct link to his biography is sufficient.
  • I have a few issues surrounding the 20th victory. In the quote, he says "in which our friend was sitting" but no explanation is given in the article: are we supposed to know who this is? The subsequent sentence "And so it was that the 20th aerial victory that qualified Böhme for the Pour le Merite was a surrender." comes across more as journalistic rather than a formal, academic tone as required by the MOS.
  • "With the Battle of Cambrai raging.." Avoid the Noun plus -ing construction.
  • "In 1921, Böhme's purloined final letter to Annamarie.." Remove "purloined"; it has already been explained what happened to it, the use of the word here is unnecessarily inflammatory.
  • The table needs a table caption and row and column scopes to adhere to MOS:DTT.
  • I don't understand the citations to "Werner (1930), p. translated excerpt.." Are they all on the same page? Where have these translated excerpts been seen?

Overall this is a decent article, but it suffers throughout from being written more like a journalistic or informal biography than a formal encyclopaedia article. I have highlighted the most egregious examples above, but generally it could do with a thorough copy edit to adopt a more formal style as required by the MOS. Harrias (he/him) • talk 12:50, 16 February 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Erwin_Böhme&oldid=1149433478"