Wikipedia:Peer review/H. C. McNeile/archive1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
One of the forgotten giants of the golden age of British detective fiction, H. C. McNeile is now more likely to be remembered for the rather odious views on race and anti-Semitism he included in his stories from time to time. Best known for his Bulldog Drummond stories, McNeile created the forerunner to later thriller heroes—Drummond was both a proto-Bond and Biggles—but he also wrote extensively about the First World War, while serving on the front line. Although FA may well be a step too far, I'd like to get this as close as possible to that standard. Many thanks for any constructive criticism and suggestions. – SchroCat (talk) 17:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cassianto's comments

Lead section

• Should it be captain as its descriptive?
  • It should, and now is! - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Even though I know your like-minded thoughts, It wouldn't be a Cassianto review if I didn't mention the ghastly WP:DISINFOBOX. I don't want to create a war, like you, so this is merely a mention ;)
  • I agree that it would be better without one, but the other active editor on the page is a fan of them and as it pre-exists my interest, I'm (probably) going to let sleeping dogs lie on this one. - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agreed entirely. -- Cassianto^Talk 23:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "The character was based on McNeile himself, his idea of an English gentleman and his friend Gerard Fairlie." - Should there be a comma after gentleman? It sounds as if he based the character on three persons; McNeile, an English gentleman, and Fairlie.
  • It was based on the three people (or types of people) there. I've struggled to get this done cleanly. Maybe: The character was based on McNeile himself, his friend Gerard Fairlie and McNeile's idea of an English gentleman." This sounds a little too contrived, especially with the repeated "McNeile". - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes I agree it does sound a little contrived. I ended up there too. No worries, leave it as it is and we will see if anyone else picks up on it; if they do then perhaps they can offer an alternative. - Cassianto^Talk 23:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "McNeile wrote ten Bulldog Drummond novels, as well as three plays and a screenplay." - In 1920 or in total over his career? (I suspect the latter. Excuse my non-intensional flippancy:)
  • Excused! Now tweaked. - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

• "...although he was not particularly good at it." - Redundency? It would be more suited if he were a champion sportsman who started off rubbish.
  • Agreed - although I've left it in the image caption. - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cool. - Cassianto^Talk 23:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "...from which he passed out and was commissioned into the Royal Engineers as a second lieutenant in July 1907" If he was commissioned, could we take if for gospel that he initially passed out?
  • As far as I am aware, the two are not mutually exclusive, so both should be OK. I'll drop a line to a couple of the MilHist bods to see if they agree. - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • One would assume that if you pass out, your accepted into the lower ranks and thus able to apply for promotion or commission. If you don't pass out, you can't. The "passing out" bit just seemed redundant IMO. Maybe this is why I am not a member of the MilHist project! lol -- Cassianto^Talk 23:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • The ever-helpful Dank agrees that "passed out" is superfluous and I've struck it accordingly. - SchroCat (talk) 13:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First world war - Looks OK

• Many thanks so far! - SchroCat (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Next batch

• Taxi back to Early life and we seem to have a stray ref who has lost its way.
  • Now delivered to the right location. - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Post war

• "...and a further seven by McNeile's friend Gerard Fairlie. The character was an amalgam of McNeile himself, his idealised concept of an English gentleman and his friend Gerard Fairlie." - Could we get away with surname usage for Gerald on the second mention?
  • We can - and without the double "friend" reference too. - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "... "a brutalized ex-officer whose thirst for excitement is also an attempt to reenact [sic] the war. -- The closing quotation mark has gone AWOL.
  • Now confined to the correct quarters. - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life

• Some may not know where the Savoy Theatre is (there are three on WP). Rather than being made to click off to find out, could we not say: "...before opening in London at the Savoy Theatre on 21 December 1937" or "...before opening at London's Savoy Theatre on 21 December 1937."
  • "Now located appropriately, to the tune of "There's only one Savoy Theatre, one Savoy Theatre..." etc - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Writing

• "Those works published between 1915 and 1918, are his war stories, and relate directly to his experiences during the First World War; while those published from 1919 onwards, are largely thrillers. - sounds better I think?
  • Done - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "McNeile's war stories were marketed by the Daily Mail and Hodder & Stoughton as being eyewitness accounts, and produced by a professional serving soldier" Or, "McNeile's war stories were marketed by the Daily Mail and Hodder & Stoughton as being eyewitness accounts, from a professional serving soldier." Obviously ignore all if this was the actual marketing slogan used.
  • "From" is better and is now the version used. - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "...particularly The Lieutenant and Others and Sergeant Michael Cassidy, R.E.— and then afterwards in his fictional stories, particularly the Bulldog Drummond stories" - Particularly repetitive, especially when we consider that the next sentence starts "McNeile's fictional work—particularly his Drummond series of books..."
  • Tweaked down to two: let me know if it looks odd. - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • That was the one I would have removed, it looks much better. -- Cassianto^Talk 08:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "Similarly, his thrillers also sold well."
  • Re-worked. I'd also missed out a "sold", which would have made three, but should be okay now... - SchroCat (talk)

-- Cassianto^Talk 23:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Many thanks for your comments and suggestions (and the ce you did during the write-up). All very much appreciated! - SchroCat (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. I think I caught everything but I will give it another read through today. Great work as usual! -- Cassianto^Talk 08:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

comments from Tim Riley

• General
  • McNeile's name occurs more than 100 times in the article. In some paras, e.g. the second one in the First World War section, I reckon you could replace half of them with "he" or "his" to good effect.
    • Considerable swapping taken place: I'll have a fresh read later and see if I can winkle out a few more. - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was taught to avoid the construction "journalist John Smith" or "historian Joan Brown", as either Americanisms or tabloid journalese. The insertion of a definite article before the job-description improves matters 100%, but to each his own.
    • Articles added where appropriate. (If I've missed any, I'll try and pick them up in a later sweep) - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Early life
  • "and counted a general in the British Indian Army among their descendants; McNeile's great uncle was the canon of Liverpool" – two things here; "descendants" is confusing: I'd just say "members". And while I quite see why you want to mention a general in the context of Sapper I'm blest if see why it matters that he had a relation who was a clergyman.
    • Both tweaked - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• First World War
  • "where he held the rank of commander" – I know little of military matters, but didn't know there was a rank of commander in the RE. Quite prepared to be corrected about this.
    • Quite right: he was in command, but not a Commander, so now appropriately tweaked. - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "McNeile would later admit"– not sure what the past modal auxiliary has here that the plain past tense hasn't
    • Nothing but my ineptitude at work here: past tense it is. - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "released from the army so he could work" – a bit informal for an encyclopedia article, perhaps; you might consider "released from the army to work" instead
    • Done - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lawrence Treadwell observed" – it is usual (I know not why) to use the present tense for such phrases, even when the author is long dead.
    • He now observes - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Middlesex Regiment under McNeile … again Mentioned in Despatches" – a long sentence, with two "and"s stringing it together. Perhaps a semicolon instead of the second "and"?
    • Yes - now in place. - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Post War
  • Subheading – the OED hyphenates "post-war" both as a noun and as an adjective
    • Consider it now hyphenated - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Drummond's main adversary"… to the end of the para – up to you, naturally, but I'd expect the descriptions of the plot to be in the present tense. I wonder if other people agree with me?
    • I certainly agree with you (as does the MOS, I think), so present tense it is - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "character with Jim Maitland" – the character of ….?
    • "of" it is - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the central protagonist" – I think technically you can only have one protagonist, and so "central" is tautologous.
    • Quite right: central is now stricken - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "McNeile and his wife returned to England after Britain came off the gold standard" – if you're going to mention the gold standard I think you'd better say why it's relevant to McN's relocation: it isn't discernible with the naked eye.
    • I suspect because is was advantageous from a tax point of view to return, but I'll go on a hunt for confirmation first - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Nothing found, except a repetition that they came back after Britain left gold. I've taken it out and will keep an eye out for anything else I stumble across later. - SchroCat (talk) 14:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• The First World War
  • Subheading – I think we are enjoined to leave definite articles out of headers where possible
    • Now removed - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Reception
  • "knock-down-and-drag-out yearn" – "yarn", not "yearn" I imagine, but I didn't like to alter ir.
    • Yarn it is - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "contrasted with their consideration" – I think the TLS is singular, not plural, and requires "its" rather than "their"
    • Now in the singular - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's my lot. It's a good article. Please let me know when you take it to FAC. Tim riley (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks indeed for your thoughts and comments—they are very much appreciated. I think I've done justice to your efforts, but I'll have another look through later (especially over the excessive use of McNeile and the return from Switzerland point). Thanks again - SchroCat (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: You seem to have quite a lot of useful comments here, so at least for the moment I'll confine my remarks to image matters, and a few points on the lead prose:

Images

• I have some reservations about the new image in the infobox.

• Under the licence provided, you are required to specify in the image description the research you have carried out to find who the author was. Such information doesn't seem to be provided.

• I think the uploader may have done that, but I have undertaken a number of searches and added the lack of positive results to the description. - SchroCat (talk) 09:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Even so, the present licence tag doe not indicate that the image is PD in the US, which is the overriding requirement.

• Now sorted and tagged appropriately - SchroCat (talk) 15:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Replaced with the original image. Although the ciggie card is in the UK public domain, it isn't in the US, so sadly the original returns. As Cassianto commented, this one is like looking at him "through a fishbowl". I'll see if I can find something else which suits, but I'm not sure how successful it wil be. - SchroCat (talk) 05:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The source link on the Du Maurier image does not provide source or date information.

• It's from a 2007 article on the Daily Mail website, but carries no date or attribution. As it's unclear, I've replaced it with a US lobby card from the corresponding film. I'd rather have an image of GdM (as the first person to play Dummond), so I'll track down something with a cast-iron PD status and drop it in at some point when the images are refreshed. - SchroCat (talk) 15:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• File:William Sydney Porter by doubleday.jpg File information needs sorting out. There is a link indicating the publication of this image in a book published in 1917, so its PD ststus is not in doubt, but this is poorly represented by the information provided.
  • Now clarified. - SchroCat (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• File:Bulldog Drummond Poster.jpg: again, the source link does not confirm the information that this poster dates from 1922.
  • New link supplied which clarifies the date as 1922. - SchroCat (talk) 12:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead prose

• Second sentence: "He started writing short stories based on his experiences in the trenches during the First World War, which were published in the Daily Mail" is worded with a slight ambiguity. To avoid this I would turn it round a bit : "From his experiences in the trenches during the First World War he started writing short stories, which were published in the Daily Mail".
  • Now turned around. - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "...he was given the pen name Sapper, the nickname of his regiment, the Royal Engineers." Was he "given" the name (if so, by whom?), or did he adopt it? Incidentally, the Corps of Royal Engineers is known as "the Sappers", not as "Sapper", so a little rewording might be in order.
  • The coiner of the name now given and all re-worded. - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "The character was based on McNeile himself, his idea of an English gentleman and his friend Gerard Fairlie." I interpret this as meaning that the character had three elements: (a) McNeile himself, (b) some concept that McNeile had of what an "English gentleeman" was typically like, and (c) Fairlie. If my assumption is right, I think the idea could be put more plainly.
  • Yes, I struggled over this one, re-wrote a number of times and still wasn't happy with the final version. I've re-worked again and hope it's clearer and less clumsy. - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "McNeile interspersed his Drummond work with other novels and story collections, including two characters..." Misused participle; needs to be "that included".
  • Now corrected - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's all for the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 23:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Brian. I've tweaked the lead as appropriate. I'm something of a traveller in a foreign land when it comes to PD matters, so I'll wrap a wet towel on my brow and start reading up. Thanks again and regards - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no great expert myself, but for FAC purposes it is essential that every image page has a description, a verifiable source and a date, so that the particulars of the licence tag can be checked. I have found this table quite useful in helping to sort out what is PD in the US. Brianboulton (talk) 12:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I try and avoid the problems by using as much from Commons as possible, but always (foolishly) forget to check if they have been set up properly there! Thanks for the very useful table, which will come in handy as I try and work through these. I've also posted a request for help at Commons on these, as I think that although most of the images may be OK (based on my dubious grasp of copyright), there are too many questions which are unclear. Thanks again! - SchroCat (talk) 12:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Brian. I think I've covered all your points now. - SchroCat (talk) 15:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to all who took part in the PR: your help and comments were much appreciated in developing and polishing this article. - SchroCat (talk) 03:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]