This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
A fact from Heinz Schnabel and Harry Wappler escape attempt appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 March 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that in 1941, two German POWs escaped from their British prison camp and stole a plane from an
RAF base to try to reach the continent?
We have the guts of a good, albeit small, article here. My initial thoughts are that the structure is the area that requires the most improvement so I am going to do some suggestions around this aspect primarily along with a few other comments on things that have caught my eye. Detailed comments may follow once the structure has been sorted.
Rather than the "Initial capture..." heading, I suggest "Background".
The material on Wappler is disproportionate to Schabel and should be trimmed. Eg some of the details of the flight leading to his capture, names of his crew. The point being the first loss due to barrage balloons is interesting and should stay. Where does Harry come from?
Removed crew names and removed mention of 'Kurt' because most of the cited sources only call Wappler Harry, except for von Mullenheim-Rechberg who calls him 'Karl Wappler', presumably erroneously. The Wappler details just seems longer because there was more to his downing, but the same amount of specificity is also given for Schnabel
Kges1901 (
talk)
00:36, 26 August 2019 (UTC)reply
I think there should be a separate section for Shap Wells, with location information, when Schnable and Wappler arrived, maybe its size (in number of inmates). In the current Wappler section it is referred to as a hotel and given a number; this may need explaining. (I've done some googling, found this
link which may be useful, see the bit about the U-Boat hotel.
The exact date that Shnabel and Wappler arrived isn't given in the cited sources.
The Shap Wells hotel has secondary source coverage in at least one academic book
[1]. So I might just create an article and link it from here.
Kges1901 (
talk)
10:59, 28 August 2019 (UTC)reply
I'm still not happy with this. I consider that there should be a distinct section for the POW camp and a bit more explanation about it. I see that the nominator hasn't participated in this review. It shouldn't fall to other editors to do the necessary revision work.
Zawed (
talk)
00:07, 28 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Sources - not sure why you have chapter titles in some citations, they don't seem necessary.
Looking at the ISBNs, the books for which chapter titles are provided were cited using the ebook version so doing some mind reading here, L293D included them for additional verification because ebooks don't have the same type of page numbers
Kges1901 (
talk)
00:36, 26 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Zawed,
Kges1901, where does this review currently stand? The last comment and response was made nearly four weeks ago, the same day as the most recent edit to the article referred to in that response. Thanks.
BlueMoonset (
talk)
17:13, 27 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Yes, I have been remiss in not coming back to this. I still have a structure/content issue with the article and have reiterated this above. I'm inclined to fail this in the next few days as I don't think it should fall on other editors, such as
Kges1901, to do the nominator's work (who hasn't participated in this review at all).
Zawed (
talk)
00:07, 28 September 2019 (UTC)reply
I agree. In the end, I just do not have enough interest in this subject to make the significant changes.
L293D: Now that you are back, would you be willing to participate in this review?
Kges1901 (
talk)
12:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
daring, but ultimately unsuccessful "daring" is an opinion and shouldn't be stated in Wikipedia voice, see
WP:EDITORIALIZING.
Done.
I would suggest "attempted to fly to the continent" in the lede and "For their daring, but ultimately unsuccessful escape attempt" in the body. In the lede, "attempted" implies it was unsuccessful and in the body it's already clear that it wasn't.
Done.
neutral Eire (Ireland) Just "neutral Ireland", per
WP:IRE-IRL.
Done.
Holland Do you actually mean
Holland? Otherwise use Netherlands, with no link per
MOS:OVERLINK
Done.
forced to land This implies something else; they were in control of the aircraft and decided to land.
Done.
six confirmed 'kills' Should be "six enemy aircraft confirmed destroyed" or similar to avoid slang that may confuse non-experts.
According to Worldcat the other publications were under "Midland", which like Classic is an imprint of Crecy Publishing.
This does not convince me that any of them are RS. buidhe15:48, 14 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Per previous GA review, I'm not sure what the blockquote in "Harry Wappler" section is adding to the article. It doesn't seem sufficiently relevant to the escape. buidhe15:48, 14 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Done.
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Approve ALT1 This Good Article was promoted recently enough, is definitely more than long enough (not sure if a GA can even be below that limit), and it reads neutrally. Both hooks are below the limit in terms of length, so that's good, and I find them to be an interesting enough fact about the topic. The QPQ has been done and the image proposed is public domain, used in the article, and looks fine at this size requirement. Everything looks good to go.
SilverserenC22:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Battleship Bismarck
Hey,
L293D, I got this Bismarck book to check the name of Alan Garydon, which I wondered might have been Graydon, and I'm not finding this incident on pages 62-63. Pages 62-63 are in a chapter called Sea Trials and Battle Practice. Do you have the copy you were using available, or remember what chapter it might have been in? The one I have has a publication date of 1990 and says 'New and Expanded Edition.' I tried looking in the index but don't see any mention of the three men.
--valereee (
talk)
12:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Valereee: The book I cite has ISBN 978-1-61251-294-5; I assume the book you cite has ISBN 978-0-87021-096-9. Both books are titled the same, and are by the same author, but the book I cite is from 2012, whereas the other book is from 1980.
This is the book I cite; is
this the book you have? I have to admit I did make a glaring error in the book cite template, I have fixed it
now. L293D (
☎ •
✎)01:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)reply
lol
L293D, the one I have is ISBN 0-87021-027-0 which is
this from 1990. So I guess this incident must have been something completely new added into a much later addition! At any rate, the name Garydon isn't a typo, or at least not our typo? If you have the book in hand, can you tell what he's using for sources for that detail?
--valereee (
talk)
08:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)reply
I just realized Alan Garydon isn't mentioned in Bismark, I've removed his name. I checked my other sources, but I don't see where that name came from. Hope that settles this. L293D (
☎ •
✎)13:35, 9 March 2020 (UTC)reply