Talk:Kurt Wolff (aviator)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Reassessed as B Class as article has been greatly expanded.Georgejdorner (talk) 20:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 06:30, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

My apologies to all. I will not be submitting DYK noms for a while. Looking at the below, I realize I have fallen into another occurrence of my PTSD. I am going into seclusion to get my head straight. I will be inactive or, at most, semiactive in WP for a while, probably until after Tet. I leave the DYK to whomever, to do whatever. Again, I apologize to those I offended.Georgejdorner (talk) 06:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

• ... that Kurt Wolff decorated his room with machine guns? Source: Franks & Giblin, Under the Guns of the Kaiser's Aces, p. 142. "...Kurt Wolff became an avid collector of souvenirs from the aircraft he had shot down. His room on the airfield was soon 'decorated' with numbers, guns, and parts looted from the machines of his vanquished foes."

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/SS John V. Moran
• Comment: I have an ALT1 hook in reserve, but believe this a more interesting one.

Improved to Good Article status by Georgejdorner (talk). Self-nominated at 05:17, 1 January 2021 (UTC).

• GA checks out, QPQ checks out, hook is interesting but I have one topic for discussion, that of "his room". The article says he had a room at the airfield, perhaps we could make the hook clearer to say that he decorated his room at La Brayelle Airfield with machine guns? Otherwise I have no complaints here. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• Is making the hook more detailed adding clarity, or is it subtracting "hookiness"? I think the latter. As it is, the hook is literally true while being a bit mysterious.Georgejdorner (talk) 17:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• very well. It sounds like he's a student to me, with "his room", but you're right that it adds four extra words and possibly unnecessary clarity. Go with your choice. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

• Hi, I came by to promote this, but I agree with The Rambling Man that a little more description needs to be added here. People are so on edge from Capitol Hill rioters and other gun-toting anarchists that putting this on the main page, sounding like some college kid decorating his room, is asking for trouble. Here are alt ideas:
• ALT1: ... that Kurt Wolff decorated his room at La Brayelle Airfield with machine guns?
• Or:
• ALT2: ... that fighter ace Kurt Wolff decorated his room with machine guns? Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• The watering down of the original hook into ALT1 and ALT2 does nothing to change the hook's supposedly controversial hook, but does lessen reader appeal. And to think that an obscure historical listing in WP would spark some sort of civic unrest in the first place is ridiculous.
• Needless to say, I disapprove of ALT1 and ALT2.Georgejdorner (talk) 01:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
• I might add that ALT1 is factually incorrect.Georgejdorner (talk) 01:28, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
• One more try, then it's your turn.
• ALT3: ... that Kurt Wolff kept shot-down airplane parts and machine guns as souvenirs? Yoninah (talk) 11:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• Somehow, fiddling with the meaning of my suggested hook will keep armed yobbos from running amok in the streets? Please, have some respect for reason. If my mention of firearms in the DYK is somehow so upsetting it must be censored, you should censor all mention of firearms in DYK to be consistent. After you justify censorship to the WP community. But rather than submit to censorship of my ALT1, I would rather have the nomination killed.Georgejdorner (talk) 16:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• Why not add just a little extra to the original hook:

• ALT4: ... that Kurt Wolff decorated his room with machine guns from the planes he shot down?

That's still an interesting hook, while giving some context. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that you did not bother to read the above, or you would realize ALT4 is just as poorly conceived as the other alternatives suggested above. I am really baffled by the insistence that watering down interest in the DYK hook to make it less interesting will prevent the Proud Boys and Antifa from rioting. Is there an explanation for that? A news article, blog, tweet, whatever? From anyone?Georgejdorner (talk) 21:20, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• Alt5 ... that World War I fighter ace Kurt Robert Wilhelm Wolff shot down 33 enemy aircraft in four months, including 22 victims during Bloody April?

My contribution. --evrik ^(talk) 23:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

ALT5 is probably the definitive hook on the subject matter. The other offered hooks would need some work. People who love guns tend to use their walls to display whatever they use as trophies, animals, human heads, or objects, or the weapons themselves. Not necessarily notable to state the obvious. — Maile (talk) 02:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

• • "When you write the hook, please make it "hooky", that is, short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article — as long as they don't misstate the article content."
  • Look familiar? It should. It's WP policy for writing hooks.
  • Now read my original hook. It does not misstate the article content. It is definitely catchy and mysterious.Georgejdorner (talk) 13:37, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Now read the following suggestions by other editors. Notice that as they get longer, they lose their punch and catchiness and become less likely to attract readers to click the link and read the article. They devolve in quality to ALT5.
  • ALT5 is flatter than last week's beer. It is a flat out bore.Georgejdorner (talk) 13:37, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

    • And yet, it is still not as boring as "someone decorated his room with something". —David Eppstein (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

    • I request that this discussion not yet be closed because there is a Rfc pending. Thank you.Georgejdorner (talk) 13:42, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
      • I would request that I am not dragged into this please. I made my feelings clear in my initial review and don't need or want the drama at all. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
        • Am I the only one noticing that ALT5 consists of facts cherry-picked from various locations within the article, with no supporting cites there or here?Georgejdorner (talk) 19:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
          • Noticing what? The hook is a restatement of the second sentence of the page, which takes its facts (cited) from the article. I'm tapping out on this one. Good luck. --evrik ^(talk) 19:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
            • It's so strange that every hook suggestion from a good faith editor is receiving backlash. It's just simple fixes like adding "fighter ace" before his name or restating the article's content. If there are "no supporting cites there or here", that would only be on the nominator. I also do see David Eppstein's point about the hook being boring. Even a common non-notable person could have stuff on their walls of any room based on their interests and a notable person is no different. A difference would be ALT4 because not many people would place guns on their wall that were from planes that they actually shot down. Georgejdorner should probably just accept that they are in the minority about what hook is interesting and move on. SL93 (talk) 14:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
              • Okay, I concede. A careful review of the DYK policies has shown me that only nominators are required to supply cites and supporting evidence for cites. Reviewers are under no such restriction to prove truth. This clears the way for ALT5, even though it is not followed by a cite because it is from the lead. In fact, it clears you reviewers to run any hook you want. It has also made me realize that defense of a hook in DYK is pretty much wasted effort, because reviewers can still run whatever they can dream up.Georgejdorner (talk) 04:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
                • Georgejdorner "Reviewers are under no such restriction to prove truth." is wrong. If the lead in the article is not referenced there or in the body of the article, it's on you for even trying to nominate it. Though I do see that the information in ALT5 is also in the body of the article with citations so you seem confused. SL93 (talk) 05:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
                  • SL93 I'm surprised you do not know the requirement that the sentence that originates a hook must be followed by a citation. By your scheme, two-thirds of ALT5 should be proven by two cites buried in the body of the text to account for victories, with the four-barreled name unaccounted for.
                  • If you can show me where you have ever supplied cites and supporting evidence for a hook as a reviewer, I will withdraw my above statement and apologize for it.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:44, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
                    • You don't seem to realize how easy of a fix that is before the article hits the main page. I don't need to prove myself to you nor do I value an apology from you. SL93 (talk) 05:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Misplaced comments moved from article's talk page

A suggested historical hook for a DYK on Kurt Wolff (aviator) is under discussion because reviewers believe that mention of a 1917 event in certain words will spark rioting in the streets.Georgejdorner (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• What are you asking people to comment on? --evrik ^(talk) 19:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
• That is an extremely biased, misleading, and missing-the-bigger-picture summary of the archived discussion at WT:DYK, which also included significant discussion on how boring and non-hooky the suggested hook is. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
• The original hook is just not that interesting (X put machine guns on his walls). It might be more interesting with some context, but the nominator isn't interested in that, or indeed in anything that isn't the original hook. So much so that they trashed the latest proposal even though it echoed one of their own sentences in the article's lede. I believe one person thought this might not be the best time for such a hook, but the reason the rest of us have chimed in is that the hook doesn't meet the basic "interesting" criteria. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
• @Georgejdorner, Evrik, David Eppstein, and BlueMoonset: The DYK hook should be discussed at Template:Did you know nominations/Kurt Wolff (aviator), not here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
  • "People are so on edge from Capitol Hill rioters and other gun-toting anarchists that putting this on the main page, sounding like some college kid decorating his room, is asking for trouble."
  • This quote is what sparked my Rfc. Pardon me for bothering the WP community with such petty concerns as censorship. It is much easier to critique me for insisting that reviewers conform to the same standards as nominators.Georgejdorner (talk) 04:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
    • The issue for the majority of naysayers is that your hook is incredibly boring. SL93 (talk) 05:20, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

ALTs 3 and 4 would both make good hooks IMO if the phrase "German fighter ace" was added. I think they'd attract plenty of interest. Gatoclass (talk) 11:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Continuing in the nominator's absence

Nominator Georgejdorner has posted that they will be absent from DYK for a while. How do we wish to proceed? We could continue with the previous hooks that hadn't been objected to, including the modifications to ALTs 3 and 4 per Gatoclass above:

• ALT3a: ... that German fighter ace Kurt Wolff kept shot-down airplane parts and machine guns as souvenirs?
• ALT4a: ... that German fighter ace Kurt Wolff decorated his room with machine guns from the planes he shot down?

There's also ALT5 above, though I've removed a comma from it. I've struck the original hook and ALT2 (ALT1 had previously been struck).

Courtesy ping to those who have been involved earlier in this review (no requirement to return): The Rambling Man, Yoninah, evrik, Maile, SL93, and David Eppstein.

Reviewer needed to look at the various hooks and decide which of them are suitable for use: interesting, in the article, and properly cited. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The nominated hook was fine. It won't win any awards, and it certainly won't incite violence, but it was fine. This appears to have been a lot a kerfuffle over not much, and has resulted in a lot of upset. Got to learn when to let things go. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Having taken another look at this, ALTs 4 or 4a look like the best choice to me. I agree with David Eppstein and others who argued that the original hook does not contain enough information. Gatoclass (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

3a or 4a are good. --evrik ^(talk) 01:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

If the choice will be between these two then ALT4a is probably the most interesting option since it specifies that the souvenirs came from planes that he shot down, as opposed to the more vague ALT3. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

• Are there no remaining objections to the article? If there are none I will approve ALT4a. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:07, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man, Gatoclass, BlueMoonset, Evrik, Maile66, SL93, and David Eppstein: Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

• None here. --evrik ^(talk) 19:28, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

• Okay, ALT4a is now approved; assuming good faith on the book source as I can't access it. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:14, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Request for comment

A suggested historical hook for a DYK on Kurt Wolff (aviator) is under discussion because reviewers believe that mention of a 1917 event in certain words will spark rioting in the streets.Georgejdorner (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• What are you asking people to comment on? --evrik ^(talk) 19:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
• That is an extremely biased, misleading, and missing-the-bigger-picture summary of the archived discussion at WT:DYK, most of which centered on how boring and non-hooky the suggested hook is. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)