Talk:John T. Hayward

John T. Hayward has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 30, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Physics: Biographies Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Biography: Military / Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: Aviation / Biography / Maritime / North America / United States / World War II / Cold War

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Military biography task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Higher education

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Not sure that I'd bother quoting medal citations that weren't combat or Manhattan Project related. At his pay grade, Legions of Merit and the like are common end of tour awards.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John T. Hayward/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 18:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

Minor bits:
"As former batboy for the New York Yankees," - is there only one batboy per team? If not, I'd suggest "a former batboy" would sound more natural.
- Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"the Bomb damage" - is the capitalisation right? (NB: it may be a nuance in the atomic literature; it's lower case later though)
- Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"As a boy, he was a batboy" - If you went for "As a youth, he was a batboy" you'd avoid the repetition.
- Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"bosun" - might be worth linking.
- Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Pacific Theater" - the citations. Probably just my personal style (so treat as a personal opinion, not as a GA review requirement) but I wondered if these would read better if converted into regular narrative (i.e. describe what he did as events, using the citation as a reference, rather than just quoting the citations). Just a thought.
- Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
" Defense expenditure on research and development grew from $525 million to $4 billion" - it would be worth giving the modern equivalents here (I can help if nec.)
- Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

Clear. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

Clear.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

Looks fine at this stage. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(c) it contains no original research.

None spotted.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

All good.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

All good.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

Neutral. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Stable. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictory

This article states he flew the first "Little Boy pumpkin bomb" aboard a Neptune off a carrier. Pumpkin bombs (if you believe the wiki article linked from this page) were dummy Fat Man bombs - a "Little Boy pumpkin bomb" would thus appear to be a contradiction in terms. Unless verified that inert Little Boy bombs were also called pumpkin bombs with some suitable reference, this should probably be reworded as inert Little Boy bomb, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.13 (talk) 12:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For a start, there already is a suitable reference in the article, Hayward & Borklund 2000, p. 183. If you'd checked it, you would have found the reference to a Little Boy pumpkin. Here is a picture of one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]