![]() | Walter Tull was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 11, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I took out the following as it did not follow on from the previous section and without a citation appeared to be speculation and promotion of a commercial venture To secure the posthumous award of Walter's Military Cross; a site for a symbolic physical representation of the contribution of Tull and other black soldiers to Britain's military history; and funding both for a screenplay dramatising the incredible life of this remarkable human being, and a stage play by Maya Productions, to tour regional and rural venues. If you can find a source for this information with some rewording to avoid the promotional context this would be relevant to include, lets discuss. Tmol42 ( talk) 17:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Edward Braithwaite mentions James Swaby as being commissioned as lieutenant in the British Army (Braithwaite, Edward (1971). Creole Society in Jamaica 1770 - 1820. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 172.). Can anyone shed more light on this claim? Leutha ( talk) 23:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems that Tull's commision is now known to have been pre-dated by at least two others:
Nick Cooper ( talk) 11:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
References
The only mention of this is in a letter of condolence sent by 2nd Lieutenant Pickard to Tull's family. He says "He had been recommended for the Military Cross and had certainly earned."
This has led to a campaign for a posthumous MC based on the mistaken belief that he'd been refused one because of racism.
However, the MoD have made clear that there was never a recommendation and there is no record of one in his full service record held at the National Archives.
This was simply a letter of condolence to a grieving family. If there is no record of any recommendation being passed up the hierarchy, and no record in his service files, then the MoD are right to say he was never recommended for one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganpati23 ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
The text currently reads "Tull was commissioned as a second lieutenant ... despite the 1914 Manual of Military Law specifically excluding soldiers that were not "of pure European descent" from becoming commissioned officers." I have tagged this as dubious.
The 1914 Manual of Military Law is available on line https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015031059614;view=1up;seq=216. The phrase "of pure European descent" is found just once (page 198, Ch XI, s 15) with reference only to the Special Reserve of Officers which was a small subset of British Army Officers. There it states that Special Reserve Officers can be “natural born or naturalised British subjects of pure European descent”. Nedrutland ( talk) 09:22, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Various claims have been made about Tull. He was clearly not the first Black or mixed-heritage British Army officer; was he possibly the first infantry officer in the British Army or "the British Army's first ever black officer to command white troops" or "the first black officer to lead white troops" or the "first black combat Officer".
Nedrutland ( talk) 19:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
At the moment it's using the football infobox, however it should be using a combined info box for military person also. However I am not sure if the top should be {{Infobox military person}}
or start with {{Infobox person}}
with the other two embedded.
Govvy (
talk)
11:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: JC Kotisow ( talk · contribs) 06:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
@ Govvy I am pleased to say that I will be reviewing your article of Walter Tull. Looking and reading through, this article could use improvement but if done correctly, would pass GA status. I'll be sure to update with suggestions and a list of errors I have found. Contact me if you have any questions or simply want to discuss something. Cheers, JC Kotisow ( talk) 06:35, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Asilvering ( talk · contribs) 23:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Govvy, I see that you haven't made very many edits to this article and that not much has changed in the article recently. Could you please reaffirm that you intend to try to bring the article up to GA standard, before I begin? It looks to me like this may be a fail, and if this was a drive-by nomination I'm less inclined to give really substantial feedback, though of course I'll still give the reasons for a fail if so. -- asilvering ( talk) 00:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Alright, it's been a week, so here's the quick version. There are several unaddressed maintenance tags, including unsourced statements dating back to 2018 and a permanent dead link. This is in itself grounds for a quick fail. Additionally, it contains large amounts of trivia under the "memorials" and "media" headings, that is not usefully contextualized or narrativized. Some of the cited sources are not reliable. Is Walter Tull, 1888–1918, Officer, Footballer a reliable source? If so, why isn't it cited more often, since it's apparently an entire book-length biography on him? If not, why is it mentioned in the article? This is a long way from meeting the GA criteria, most evidently #1 and #2. -- asilvering ( talk) 04:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Walter Tull was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 11, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I took out the following as it did not follow on from the previous section and without a citation appeared to be speculation and promotion of a commercial venture To secure the posthumous award of Walter's Military Cross; a site for a symbolic physical representation of the contribution of Tull and other black soldiers to Britain's military history; and funding both for a screenplay dramatising the incredible life of this remarkable human being, and a stage play by Maya Productions, to tour regional and rural venues. If you can find a source for this information with some rewording to avoid the promotional context this would be relevant to include, lets discuss. Tmol42 ( talk) 17:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Edward Braithwaite mentions James Swaby as being commissioned as lieutenant in the British Army (Braithwaite, Edward (1971). Creole Society in Jamaica 1770 - 1820. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 172.). Can anyone shed more light on this claim? Leutha ( talk) 23:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems that Tull's commision is now known to have been pre-dated by at least two others:
Nick Cooper ( talk) 11:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
References
The only mention of this is in a letter of condolence sent by 2nd Lieutenant Pickard to Tull's family. He says "He had been recommended for the Military Cross and had certainly earned."
This has led to a campaign for a posthumous MC based on the mistaken belief that he'd been refused one because of racism.
However, the MoD have made clear that there was never a recommendation and there is no record of one in his full service record held at the National Archives.
This was simply a letter of condolence to a grieving family. If there is no record of any recommendation being passed up the hierarchy, and no record in his service files, then the MoD are right to say he was never recommended for one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganpati23 ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
The text currently reads "Tull was commissioned as a second lieutenant ... despite the 1914 Manual of Military Law specifically excluding soldiers that were not "of pure European descent" from becoming commissioned officers." I have tagged this as dubious.
The 1914 Manual of Military Law is available on line https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015031059614;view=1up;seq=216. The phrase "of pure European descent" is found just once (page 198, Ch XI, s 15) with reference only to the Special Reserve of Officers which was a small subset of British Army Officers. There it states that Special Reserve Officers can be “natural born or naturalised British subjects of pure European descent”. Nedrutland ( talk) 09:22, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Various claims have been made about Tull. He was clearly not the first Black or mixed-heritage British Army officer; was he possibly the first infantry officer in the British Army or "the British Army's first ever black officer to command white troops" or "the first black officer to lead white troops" or the "first black combat Officer".
Nedrutland ( talk) 19:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
At the moment it's using the football infobox, however it should be using a combined info box for military person also. However I am not sure if the top should be {{Infobox military person}}
or start with {{Infobox person}}
with the other two embedded.
Govvy (
talk)
11:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: JC Kotisow ( talk · contribs) 06:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
@ Govvy I am pleased to say that I will be reviewing your article of Walter Tull. Looking and reading through, this article could use improvement but if done correctly, would pass GA status. I'll be sure to update with suggestions and a list of errors I have found. Contact me if you have any questions or simply want to discuss something. Cheers, JC Kotisow ( talk) 06:35, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Asilvering ( talk · contribs) 23:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Govvy, I see that you haven't made very many edits to this article and that not much has changed in the article recently. Could you please reaffirm that you intend to try to bring the article up to GA standard, before I begin? It looks to me like this may be a fail, and if this was a drive-by nomination I'm less inclined to give really substantial feedback, though of course I'll still give the reasons for a fail if so. -- asilvering ( talk) 00:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Alright, it's been a week, so here's the quick version. There are several unaddressed maintenance tags, including unsourced statements dating back to 2018 and a permanent dead link. This is in itself grounds for a quick fail. Additionally, it contains large amounts of trivia under the "memorials" and "media" headings, that is not usefully contextualized or narrativized. Some of the cited sources are not reliable. Is Walter Tull, 1888–1918, Officer, Footballer a reliable source? If so, why isn't it cited more often, since it's apparently an entire book-length biography on him? If not, why is it mentioned in the article? This is a long way from meeting the GA criteria, most evidently #1 and #2. -- asilvering ( talk) 04:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)