Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Thomas Cooke (soldier, born 1881)

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.

Article promoted by Eddie891 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Thomas Cooke (soldier, born 1881)

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Zawed (talk)

For this latest A-Class nomination of mine, I return to the First World War with a biographical article of Thomas Cooke, a New Zealander who served with the Australian Imperial Force. Cooke was awarded a posthumous VC for his actions during the Battle of Pozières. In civilian life before the war, he was a carpenter and builder. The article underwent a GA review back in 2018. Thanks in advance to the reviewers who stop by for this one. Zawed (talk) 04:10, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images are freely licensed (t · c) buidhe 05:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~: G'day, Zawed, thanks for your work on this article. I have the following comments/queries/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

do we know if he had any siblings?

Found reference to at least two sisters, have added. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

he seems to have remained in Australia for a long period of time after enlistment (comparatively by World War I standards), do we know anything about why deployment was delayed?

The reference mentioned above also refers to him doing clerical work after enlistment. I have added this. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

do we know why he was transferred from the 24th Battalion?

Not in my sources. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Middle East --> Egypt?

Have mentioned Egypt now. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

according to the AIF Project, he had previous military service in the Wellington Military Band: [1]

Have added mention of a military band to the early life section. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

embarked on 26 November 1915: [2]

Have added month of departure. Zawed (talk) 07:17, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

transferred to the 8th Battalion on 24 February 1916: [3]

Have added month of transfer. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

he would have arrived in Egypt just at the end of the Gallipoli campaign and in early 1916, the AIF in Egypt would have been going through the process of expansion in Egypt prior to deployment to the Western Front (Bean, AIF 1916, Chapter II)

I have noted the expansion of the AIF using Dennis. Zawed (talk) 01:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sailed from Alexandria to Marseilles March 1916: [4]

Added. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

reinforcements for the 1st Infantry Brigade: suggest linking 1st Infantry Brigade

Done. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By this time Cooke had reverted to his original rank of private, having spent a period of time as an acting corporal: my version of Wigmore (p. 50) has it that reversion in rank occured on transfer to the 8th

Have reworked this. Zawed (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. Added my support above. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:26, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Hog Farm

Will take a look at this soon. Hog Farm _Bacon 04:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is pretty nitpicky, but 4 of the 7 sentences in the last paragraph of the lead all start with "He", can this be varied some?

Have rephrased to remove a couple of "He"s. Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The battalion was withdrawn from the front lines two days later, having incurred over 330 casualties" - Do we know how strong the battalion was, for a comparison

I have added a contrasting statement. Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know who recommended him for the VC?

No, don't have that info. Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe specify what the BWM and Victory medals were awarded for in the article? From clicking on the links, I can turn up that it's a general campaign medal, but it's worth indicating in the article why they were awarded to Cooke.

I have rephrased to note that they are campaign medals. Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first external link is not running for me, although since its just an empty response error, it might be just a temporary outage.

I had the same problem when I tried that link. I've made a slight tweak to the url, see how it works for you now. Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me now.

I'm unconvinced that the middle EL passes the muster of WP:ELNO #1

Yes, I have deleted. That website was on most of the NZ VC articles, I have been removing them as part of my over haul work on the articles but must have missed it here. Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for the first pass. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback Hog Farm, I have responded above. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting. Excellent work. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:28, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Pendright

Hello Zawed! I have a few comments for you to consider. Pendright (talk) 03:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Enlisting in the Australian Imperial Force in February 1915, after completing his training he embarked for the Middle East and on arrival was posted to 8th Battalion.

To stand alone, doesn’t the first clause need a subject to perform the action?
The transition from the first clauses to the second one doesn’t seem to join well?
embarked [to] ~~for~~ the Middle East
posted to [the] 8th Battalion.

I have revised the lead in response to these comments, except for the "to the Middle East". I can't quite figure out why, but that doesn't seem to fit, whereas "for the Middle East" does. Zawed (talk) 09:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Early life:

Thomas Cooke was born in Kaikoura, in the Marlborough District of New Zealand, on 5 July 1881, to an Englishman, Tom Cooke, who was a carpenter, and his wife Caroline née Cooper.

New Zealand should follow Kaikoura because it is essential to the meaning of the sentence.
Change to Tom Cooke, an Englishman,

I have revised in response to these comments. Zawed (talk) 09:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First World War:

He embarked for the Middle East aboard the HMAT Commonwealth in November, and at this time was promoted to acting corporal.

He embarked "to" the Middle East
Remove the comma after November - no subject!

comma deleted, but the "embarked to" left for now as per my comment above on the lead. Zawed (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As part of the 1st Division, ~~in mid-July,~~ it was moved to the Somme sector [in md-July] for [its] ~~the~~ upcoming ~~Somme~~ Offensive.

Consider the above changes?

Enacted this, with a slight tweak. See what you think. Zawed (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cooke, operating a Lewis gun, was sent forward with his assistants to stabilise an unsafe section of the line.

If Cooke had a gun, does a reader just presume the others had guns too?
"with his assistants" -> seems an odd way to characterize soldiers?

His assistants would have had their own rifles (Lee Enfields) plus ammunition for the Lewis gun, but this isn't explicitly stated in the source. I have rephrased this to state that the Lewis gun is a machine gun and to refer to a team (Bean says a "gun-team", but I would prefer to not use this since gun appears a few words earlier in the sentence). How does my revisions read? Zawed (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cooke has no known grave [site, but] ~~and~~ his name is recorded on the Villers-Bretonneux Memorial[8] and also on the war memorial in [Kaikoura,] his town of birth~~, Kaikoura~~.

Consider the above changes

Done. Zawed (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Finished - Pendright (talk) 03:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pendright, thank you for the comments here, and apologies for the delay in responding. Although this page is on my watch list, I missed the notification that it had been edited with your comments. Anyhow, I have made changes/responded to your points above. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Zawed: All good, supporting!

Pendright (talk) 01:09, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources - pass

Shouldn't the two items under external links have access dates? Gog the Mild (talk) 22:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't know for sure if that is a requirement for external links and can't recall that coming up as an issue in previous reviews. Regardless, I have added access dates since I can't see why it would be detrimental to include them. Thanks for taking a look at this. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 22:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was an open question - I don't know either. Although it would seem odd for them not to be.

The sources used all appear to me to be reliable. I am unable to find any other sources which would materially add to the content of the article. The sources referred to seem to support the text cited, insofar as I have checked them. I found no unattributed close paraphrasing. I consider the sources to be current, as these things go. Everything that I would expect to be cited, is. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.