| Revision as of 12:25, 10 September 2023 editCarcharoth (talk | contribs)Administrators73,550 edits add← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:30, 10 September 2023 edit undoCarcharoth (talk | contribs)Administrators73,550 edits add bit moreNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Newsroom/Comment header}} | {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Newsroom/Comment header}} | ||
| <!-----------------------------------------------------------------------> | <!-----------------------------------------------------------------------> | ||
| *Thank you, Hawkeye7, for this op-ed. When I saw the news of the film, I immediately thought of you and your work on the article! I have not seen the film yet (but intend to do so). Loved the "all history is biography" comment. Looking back at my comments on the FAC in 2011, I see we still don't have an article on ]... :-) (EDIT: I had forgotten the discussion ] that makes clear that I was splitting hairs both then and now!) It is interesting to see how an article like this holds up over 10 years later, and what new sources have been written since and how well those have been |
*Thank you, Hawkeye7, for this op-ed. When I saw the news of the film, I immediately thought of you and your work on the article! I have not seen the film yet (but intend to do so). Loved the "all history is biography" comment. Looking back at my comments on the FAC in 2011, I see we still don't have an article on ]... :-) (EDIT: I had forgotten the discussion ] that makes clear that I was splitting hairs both then and now!) It is interesting to see how an article like this holds up over 10 years later, and what new sources have been written since (as far as I can tell, the 2012 (Monk and Hunner), 2015 (Kunetka and Boyce) and 2019 (Young & Schilling) sources came after the original FAC, but without looking closer it is difficult to tell whether these were upgrades to existing sourcess, or new material being added) and how well those have been integrated into the existing article (updating a really excellent article like this is far more difficult than it can seem from the outside). Am glad it got all the page views it did, and hopefully at least some of the people reading it had their interest piqued to maybe go and read some of the original sources. ] (]) 12:20, 10 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 12:30, 10 September 2023
← Back to Op-ed
- Thank you, Hawkeye7, for this op-ed. When I saw the news of the film, I immediately thought of you and your work on the article! I have not seen the film yet (but intend to do so). Loved the "all history is biography" comment. Looking back at my comments on the FAC in 2011, I see we still don't have an article on electron–positron theory... :-) (EDIT: I had forgotten the discussion here that makes clear that I was splitting hairs both then and now!) It is interesting to see how an article like this holds up over 10 years later, and what new sources have been written since (as far as I can tell, the 2012 (Monk and Hunner), 2015 (Kunetka and Boyce) and 2019 (Young & Schilling) sources came after the original FAC, but without looking closer it is difficult to tell whether these were upgrades to existing sourcess, or new material being added) and how well those have been integrated into the existing article (updating a really excellent article like this is far more difficult than it can seem from the outside). Am glad it got all the page views it did, and hopefully at least some of the people reading it had their interest piqued to maybe go and read some of the original sources. Carcharoth (talk) 12:20, 10 September 2023 (UTC)