Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/WAVES

Nominator(s): Pendright (talk)

Featured article candidates/WAVES/archive1

Nominated for A-class on behalf of Pendright per [1]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article looks at the plight of women seeking to enter the U.S. Navy in Word War II; the difficulties they encountered along the way, and the challenges they faced once in the service of their country. On 30 July 1942, the WAVES (Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service) became the Women’s reserve branch of the United States Naval Reserve. The idea of women serving in the Navy during the War was not widely supported in the Congress, or by the Navy itself. But with the manpower shortages, women were needed to replace men for sea duty. Several notable women, including Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of the president, laid the groundwork for the passage of the law. It allowed women to serve in the U. S. Navy as an officer or at an enlisted level with a rank or rate consistent with that of the regular Navy. The article was promoted to GA in February 2016 without any thought, on my part, of pursuing ACR. Since then, I have changed my mind, and it has been reworked and reviewed by other editors. I welcome all comments. Pendright (talk) 04:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support: G'day, Pendright, nice work. I have a few suggestions (please see below). If there is anything you don't understand about my comments, please let me know and I will either try to clarify or help you with them. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"File:1939 Foreign Affairs Committee meeting.jpg": might be more visually appealing if the black border was cropped

Applying your cropping skills here would be appreciated! Thanks! Pendright (talk) 20:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the external links all work and there are no disambig links (no action required)
the article is well referenced (no action required)
headings: I suggest adding a level two header called "Training" and then subordinating "Training of officers" and "Training of enlisted" below that as level three headers

Fixed - Pendright (talk) 20:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

headings: "Women of the WAVES": not quite sure this heading is best. I wonder if it should be Personnel?

Fixed - Pendright (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

image placement: it is best to avoid sandwiching text between images, as such I think there might be one too many images in the Women of the WAVES section. I suggest maybe removing, or moving elsewhere "File:N3N female mechanic 1942 535576.jpg"

Image removed: File:N3N female mechanic 1942 535576.jpg - Pendright (talk) 20:43, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

in the body of the article, there are a few terms that are overlinked: Women's Army Corps, Yeoman (F), and SPARS. These should only be linked once in the body (when they are first mentioned)

Unlinked- Pendright (talk) 01:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

in the Song of the WAVES section, Anchors Aweigh should be presented in italics

Fixed - Pendright (talk) 01:45, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the See also section shouldn't contain non linked items, so I suggest removing SPARS, USMC Women's Reserve and Women's Army Corps

Removed - Pendright (talk) 04:22, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

in the External links, I suggest moving the Campbell work to the Further reading section

Moved - Pendright (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

same as above for the Bureau of Naval Personnel work

Moved - Pendright (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the specific topic to which it refers is buried somewhere in a host of information and not readily accessible, requiring effort and patience on the part of a reader. For my part, removing it would not affect the article one-way or the other. Care to offer an opinion? Pendright (talk) 19:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

in the Further reading section, I suggest using the {{cite book}} template to format the entries as you have in the Bibliography. This will help keep the formating consistent
suggest slightly rewording this: During the course of the war, seven of the WAVE officers and 62 of the enlisted women.... Perhaps this might be smoother: During the course of the war, seven WAVE officers and 62 enlisted women...

Fixed - Pendright (talk) 03:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Is it correct to refer to a singular "WAVE"? Seems odd for an acronym
But consider the Women's Royal Naval Service, pronounced "wrens"; the individual was known as a "wren". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:57, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Common usage says it is acceptaibe, and that notion is suppoted by most of the references' noted in the Biblography -Pendright (talk) 07:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest editing the poster caption for clarity
File:Ada_Louise_Comstock,_1923-1943_(13083782855).jpg: per the Flickr tag, are more specific copyright tags available? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:34, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Hawkeye7

I thought we went over this at GA, but I'm still not happy with this paragraph:

Little attempt was made to recruit any African-American or other women minorities until October 1944, when President Roosevelt approved of accepting African-American women into the women's reserve. He was under pressure to do so from African-American organizations. Harriet Ida Pickens and Frances Wills were the first African-American women to become WAVE officers. By September 1945, there were 72 African-American women in the WAVES and integrated.

As written, this is incorrect on several points, and misleading on others. Let's take Integration of the Armed Forces down from the self. It points out on p. 74 that the legislation that established the WAVES said nothing about the inclusion or exclusion of people of colour, so the Navy Department decided that it should be exclusively white. (As were the SPARS, Navy Nurse Corps and the Women Marines.) So it was not a case of "little attempt"; they were deliberately excluded. The turning point was not some decision by Roosevelt, but the death of Frank Knox in April 1944. Knox had said that black WAVES would be enlisted over his dead body, and so it proved. His successor, James V. Forrestal, immediately acted to reform the Navy's race policies. He submitted his proposal to accept WAVES on an integrated basis on 28 July 1944. But 1944 was an election year, so Roosevelt decided to hold it up until after the election, which was on 7 November. Forrestal attempted to compromise by offering segregated living quarters and mess facilities. Then Roosevelt's opponent, Thomas E. Dewey, made an election issue of it when he criticised the administration for discriminating against black women. Roosevelt immediately issued the order on 19 October 1944. The promise of segregated quarters could not be maintained; each recruit company contained 250 women, and there were insufficient black recruits to form an all-black company. It looked like this would become yet another excuse to exclude black women, but Captain McAfee appealed to Secretary Forrestal, and he dropped the segregation requirement. Some 72 African American WAVES were trained by at Hunter College Naval Training School by July 1945. While training was integrated, "black WAVES were restricted somewhat in speciality assignments and a certain amount of separate quartering within integrated barracks prevailed at some duty stations".(pp. 87-88) There were only 68 black WAVES in September 1945. Those that remained in the Navy after the war were employed without discrimination; but there were only five of them by September 1946. (p. 247)

I'm willing to re-write the paragraph, but not accept it as written. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:34, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]