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.
Promoted -MBK004 07:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One of the most notable soldiers of the 20th Century. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:09, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments -- Most of the images are missing alt text, and you might want to check the external link tool. No dab issues. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alt text has been added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Tks for that. Reviewed the rest now -- great work, particularly considering the import of the subject. Apart from my minor ce, just a few things:
Starting with Harvard University in 1869, civilian universities had begun grading students on academic performance alone, but West Point had retained the old "whole man" concept of education. MacArthur did not approve of this trend, but sought to modernize the system, expanding the concept of military character to include bearing, leadership, efficiency and athletic performance. He formalized the hitherto unwritten Cadet Honor Code in 1922 when he formed the Cadet Honor Committee to review honor allegations. -- this might be reprased a bit. First, can we confirm that the trend that MacArthur disapproved of was "grading students on academic performance alone"? Second, what exactly are "honor allegations"?
Yes, definitely: it was not MacArthur's intent that academic performance alone should determine class standing. In this he agreed with the Luddites. Honor allegation are allegations of lying, cheating or stealing. I have added a bit about the role of the committee. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon ignorance but did Mac really wait till he got to Australia to turn command over to Wainwright?
Yes. The idea was that MacArthur would remain as commander USAFFE so that if Wainwright were captured he couldn't surrender the forces elsewhere in the Philippines. However, Washington overrode him and appointed Wainwright to command USAFFE. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The illustrations are great but most need to be increased in size -- the one with Blamey, Kenney and co. is a good yardstick for what they should be.
I get the same large amout of white space under Honors and awards mentioned below. If I move the wikiquote template to directly under the Leyte memorial image, the white disappears -- see how that works for you... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks the same to me. I never saw any white space. Done anyway. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. You haven't cited the nicknames "Gaijin Shogun" or "Big Chief". Rather than sourcing in the infobox, I'd prefer to see their origin mentioned/cited at the appropriate point in the body of the article, as with "Dugout Doug". Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is really fantastic work. MacArthur was one of the most significant military figures of the 20th Century and played a key role in the politics of Australia and Japan yet for a long time the article on him was awful. I've got a few minor suggestions for further improvements though:
The last sentence in the 'Education and early life' section is a bit awkward
I've re-worded it. See if you like the new version better. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Saying that only "Vasey's Australian 7th Division advanced on Lae" leaves out the fact that the 9th Division was also advancing on the town from the opposite direction
Re-worded to mention the 9th Division as well. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if it's correct to say that the landing at Hollandia was 'risky' - GHQ was aware the area was only lightly defended by small numbers of second-rate troops from code breaking and were able to commit overwhelming forces.
That's what Willoughby said about Finschhafen too. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
MarArthur's unusual role as the de-facto chief military advisor to the Australian Government for much of the Pacific War deserves a mention
Their close relationship is mentioned. I pulled up short of describing him as a de facto chief military advisor. What does that mean? That he provided advice to the government? Certainly. That the government took his advice over that of Blamey or the other chiefs? Hardly. Maybe we can think up a suitable wording. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The 'quotes' section is unreferenced and belongs on Wikiquotes - I'd suggest removing it
Support very good work, IMO. I have a couple of comments, suggestions before taking to FAC:
on my screen there is a large amount of whitespace in the Honors and awards section, possibly due to the positioning of the wikiquote box (might just be me, though);
Could be. Looks okay on my browser and screen at various sizes. I moved the wikiquote box the other day. Shifted a pic to the left too. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
check your date formats, I found one example of Day Month "7 April" (in Later life section), when the rest of the article largely uses Month Day. Another example in the Meuse-Argonne Offensive ("30 September");
A Perl script found ten of them. Two remain, being in a book title. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
there is some inconsistency in the abbreviations for United States (mainly you have U.S., but I found an example of US in the Preparations subsection of World War II, also one in Leyete.
Corrected the one on Leyte. The other was generated by the conversion template, so not much that can be done... No others found. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding article, I am impressed. I would point one thing out though: With regard to Emperor Hirohito, he is now known in Japan as Emperor Showa (a line goes over the "o"). It would be nice to note that in the article somewhere. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is a very impressive article on a very important soldier. Excellent work. Parsecboy (talk) 01:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks good to me. Well done as usual. Anotherclown (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.