body.skin-vector-2022 .mw-parser-output .skiptotalk,body.mw-mf .mw-parser-output .skiptotalk{display:none}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a{display:block;text-align:center;font-style:italic;line-height:1.9}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::before,.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::after{content:"↓";font-size:larger;line-height:1.6;font-style:normal}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::before{float:left}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::after{float:right}Skip to table of contents
Featured articleDouglas MacArthur is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic starDouglas MacArthur is part of the Command in the South West Pacific Area series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 26, 2014.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 19, 2006Good article nomineeListed
September 5, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 13, 2010Good article nomineeListed
April 21, 2010WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
May 11, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 7, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
December 23, 2012Good topic candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 11, 2004, April 11, 2005, April 11, 2006, March 20, 2013, March 20, 2016, March 20, 2020, March 20, 2022, and March 20, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Confusing syntax in Early Life section[edit]

The syntax of the opening of the early life section is confusing in that it makes it sound as though Arthur MacArthur Jr. received his Medal of Honor after Douglas' birth, not before.

"A military brat, Douglas MacArthur was born 26 January 1880, at Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas, to Arthur MacArthur Jr., a U.S. Army captain, and his wife, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur (nicknamed "Pinky"). Arthur Jr. was a son of Scottish-born jurist and politician Arthur MacArthur Sr. Arthur Jr. would later receive the Medal of Honor for his actions with the Union Army in the Battle of Missionary Ridge during the American Civil War, and be promoted to the rank of lieutenant general."


This should read:

"A military brat, Douglas MacArthur was born 26 January 1880, at Little Rock Barracks in Arkansas, to Arthur MacArthur Jr., a U.S. Army captain, and his wife, Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur (nicknamed "Pinky"). Arthur Jr. was a son of Scottish-born jurist and politician Arthur MacArthur Sr. Arthur Jr., had received the Medal of Honor for his actions with the Union Army in the Battle of Missionary Ridge during the American Civil War, and later be promoted to the rank of lieutenant general." Faction123 (talk) 22:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? Douglas MacArthur was born on 26 January 1880. His father was awarded the Medal of Honor on 30 June 1890. Douglas was ten years old at the time. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: length banner and other FA concerns[edit]

I stumbled on this article to consider it for WP:OTD, but rejected it because of the length banner at the top. I read through the discussion from July and agree with Nikkimaria that the length is a problem for several reasons:

I know that specialists like more information, but Wikipedia is written for a general audience, of which there are more of then people with a specialist interest. Specialists are also more likely to seek out additional sources (like biographies) while general readers will look at the length of this article and not read anything, defeating the purpose of writing an article.

A couple of suggestions for text that might be summarised or moved to other articles:

I also have some other concerns:

Sorry for the long post. Pinging previous participants @Nikkimaria, Hawkeye7, and Srnec: Other commentators are also welcome. Z1720 (talk) 01:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your well-considered suggestions. I promise to consider and take action.
The notion that "large amounts of text make the article hard for some readers to load the page and scroll through text" has been thoroughly debunked. That readers read the article from top to bottom has also been. Studies have indicated that many readers comb the articles looking for specific information while those less interested merely read the summary in the lead. In this article the evidence is that most of the 1.5 million page views per year are from readers are looking for specific information on a particular aspect of MacArthur's life.
Wikipedia articles are not summaries of the person's biography per se; that is contrary to our policy and the first of our five pillars, which holds that Wikipedia is a written compendium of knowledge. What we are supposed to do by policy is create ever more detailed subarticles (WP:SUMMARYSTYLE) but this has recently been challenged as well, because search engines direct the readers to the main article even when a subarticle exists on precisely the topic they are looking for. I have created a couple of subarticles, but that fact has stymied suggestions of creating more. Over time the article has slowly grown, with editors continually adding more material, particularly to the Occupation of Japan and World War I sections, which obviously fall into their particular sphere of interest.
I will action your specific points. I note that there is currently no consensus as to how large sections should be. There is also a debate going on at the moment about explanatory footnotes and whether they should be included with the citations. My personal opinion is that explanatory footnotes need to be justified, with a reason why they cannot be in the body. : With reference to the "Further reading" section, these are books that myself and others have recommended. They could be used in the article for inline citations. I will consider each one.
I agree about the use of direct quotes from the source in the footnotes. This is inconsistent and unecessary.
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are dates on this article in DD/MM/YYYY?[edit]

This is a page on an American general, so shouldn't the page be in MM/DD/YYYY? Fringe, Suspect The (talk) 20:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:MILFORMAT: articles on the modern US military, including biographical articles related to the modern US military, should use day-before-month, in accordance with US military usage. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:17, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks Fringe, Suspect The (talk) 02:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MacArthur's Masonic Lodge membership[edit]

At the end of "Field Marshal of the Philippine Army" and just before the section on World War II are these two sentences:

In Manila, MacArthur was a member of the Freemasons. At the time of the occupation of Japan, MacArthur belonged to Manila Lodge No. 1 and was in the 32nd Masonic rank.

In the second sentence, should the first clause be: "At the time of the occupation BY Japan"? If not, I'm baffled as to how MacArthur's Masonic Lodge affiliation in Manila would have any relevance to the occupation OF Japan--especially since his time in Tokyo would certainly have taken away from any time he could spend in Manila. Rontrigger (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Please check the edit I made. — hako9 (talk) 17:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Rontrigger (talk) 01:19, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2024[edit]

Change "was in the 32nd Masonic rank" to "was a 32nd degree Scottish Rite Mason". The phrasing of the original excerpt is incorrect and not used by any regular Masonic body Masonicscribe (talk) 14:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Donehako9 (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]