Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Military career of Keith Miller

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Passed —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 02:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Military career of Keith Miller[edit]

An Australian Test cricketer who served as a fighter pilot in the Royal Australian Air Force in WW2 and also played for the Australian Services cricket team (an official military unit no less). YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbox
  • Comments You have one dead external link that needs to be located and either replaced or removed. Two disambig links need to be located and corrected if at all possible. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lawrencema
  • A1: Comment: Is Perry the only source available?
Obviously I will have to look for more. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Books diversified. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 05:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A2: Oppose: This is supposed to be about his military career, isn't it? Do we really need to know how many runs he scored in each innings (particularly those matches he played in Australia before he was recalled to the militia)? Isn't this information duplicated in the Keith Miller article anyway?
Yes it is, but the main reason it exists is the article is too big. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A3: Oppose: The lead section needs a substantial rewrite. I think it goes into unnecessary detail this early on into the article and doesn't seem to be about Miller's career in the military, rather it seems to be mainly about the cricket matches he played as a serviceman. I think the lead should specify the purpose of the article within the first few lines, and then stick to that throughout the article.
Redone. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A4: See comments under "A2".
This criteria seems to be about grammar, actually YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually referring to the "concise English" part of A4. In my opinion, "concise" and "no unnecessary detail" are the same thing. This is my second A-class review, so I'm sorry if I sound obtuse or hostile. Lawrence, M.J. (talk) 09:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A5: Comment: Are there more images of Miller outside of cricket and more military-oriented? I can understand the use of images related to the Victory tests for example, or the Australian services team, but for a guy who "took part in combat operations in the closing stages of the European theatre of the war, and had several narrow escapes from death", I'd expect there to be more images of him as a RAAF pilot, not a cricketer.
The AWM memorial pictures only have cricket ones. The other ones of him next to the plane are not free. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overall:PendingOppose. If I came here looking for information on Miller's military service, I think I would come away disappointed. That isn't to say there isn't any information, because there is, but you have to wade through a lot of the cricket statistics to find it.Lawrencema (talk) 12:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly I have to point out that if Miller was not a famous cricketer, nobody would care about what he did in WWII so as to write a book about it. Miller was not a decorated pilot who won DFC or any major medals for being a great pilot, nor was he a high-ranking officer - he was in there for 2-3 years. He flew in combat for about a month before VE Day. Most of the narrow escapes were training incidents or his geographical location being bombed by Axis powers, which were common for almost anyone in WWII. It was not as though this is US vs Iraq or Israel vs Hamas where the former are basically impregnable (relatively). If he was not a famous sportsperson people would not interview him about what he did in WWII and write it down. The books have about 10% of his life on WWII and most of those were about the army cricket team, because he was much much more distinguished as a cricketer than as a pilot. It was sports historians who do the research this topic and the military stuff is mostly anecdotes whacked in; it's not as though military historians rate Miller's military impact highly at all. I don't know what I can do to change the focus apart from violating WP:UNDUE. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I actually thought of that while I was doing the review, but the scope of the article is unclear from the introduction/title. Might I propose something along the lines of "Career of Keith Miller during World War II" or "Keith Miller during World War II" and then clearly state what the scope of the article is. My first impression from the title was that this would be mainly about his career as a pilot in the RAAF (obviously I don't know enough about Miller), rather than his matches as part of the services team. The other issues are secondary to the issue of scope. Lawrence, M.J. (talk) 06:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, strike all that. I just misinterpreted the whole thing (due to not knowing enough about the subject - wouldn't be the first time). The other issues (other sources and the rewriting of the introduction) still need attention though.Lawrence, M.J. (talk) 07:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I need to look for alternative sources as well, but the military weight isn't going to change. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ian Rose - comments

These will be a mix of prose, content and structure points, in their order in the article (also taken liberty of a few minor copyedits)...

  • First up, why not a military person infobox? Seems perfectly appropriate, and would allow you to drop from the intro a few points that are in any case repeated in the main body (it's a pretty long and detailed intro compared to many I've seen). I realise it would look better if we had a pic in RAAF uniform but you can't have everything...!
  • Intro:
  • First sentence, I think "when World War II interrupted his sporting career" reads better than "with World War II interrupting his sporting career".
Done YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again what I think is an example of too much detail: the 'awards' you mention are service medals that everyone gets for 'showing up' in the relevant theatre or being on active service generally. If they're mentioned at all it should only be at the end-of-war part of the main body, and even then they're pretty well superfluous if you've mentioned that he served in those theatres/conflicts.
Done. I wasn't aware that they were just for doing the mission. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, sorry I may have inadvertently led you in the wrong direction...! "He was given several awards for his service" makes it sound like he got honours or decorations like the DSO or DFC. As I say, his service/campaign medals don't count for that so best drop any mention of them in the intro entirely. They shouldn't be mentioned in the infobox for the same reason. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I haven't been back here for a while, mate... This is the only outstanding concern for me - we should drop "He was given several awards for his service" because they're not 'awards' as such, and also remove them from the infobox for the same reason. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to medals. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • More detail/repetition: "rose to the rank of flying officer" - already mentioned in first para he was a flying officer. Definitely delete one, could even lose both (and wind up with some shorter sentences!) if it's in an infobox.
Done YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • More: in the last para you say he was the top-scorer, then in the next the "top run-scorer" - don't need both.
Done YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Australia:
  • Should be using Oz-style date format, shouldn't we - day month year?
I should I guess....YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mention a guy called Beames - does he have a first name, or initials? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Britain:
  • No such rank as "flight officer" (Carmody) - do we mean flying officer?
  • "12 Air Force Unit" sounds an odd name - can you confirm that's what it was? (Perhaps should at least be "No. 12") Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Victory Tests / Services tour of India:
  • If we're mentioning the service medals, be worth linking them. However, have to admit I've never heard of the "Returned From Active Service Badge" and neither, it appears, has Wikipedia...
  • Not sure what we mean by "the Australian team sat on the ledge of the bullet-riddled aircraft". Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well it's one of the most detailed articles I've read, and may be too much, but personally while I found it 'exhaustive' I never found it 'exhausting'. If you could address my outstanding points above I think I'd support. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the rest of these I presumed you did all the dates...Removed RFSASB the author sometimes gets his names mixed up quite a lot....The RAF page says 12 AFU.... so I left it as cardinal not ordinal. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - all comments addressed, tks. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I don't think it's necessary to have citations in the middle of a sentence, but if the FA reviewers aren't objecting to this, then I guess it doesn't really matter. Otherwise, outstanding work on a very well-detailed article.Comment/question: In the last paragraph of the "Britain" section, it states that Miller was assigned to 12 Advanced Flying Unit in 1946. But later in the paragraph, it mentions his escape from a V1 rocket attempt. Is 1946 the correct year that this happened? Cla68 (talk) 07:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Cla68 (talk) 07:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed, 1944, YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Meets all criteria, excellent referencing. --Eurocopter (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

}}

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Military_career_of_Keith_Miller&oldid=1088198115"