Jump to content

Talk:206th Field Artillery Regiment

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Damon.cluck (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda confused by the Orphan Tag. I count at least six external links to this page:

  • 39th Brigade Combat Team
  • 153rd Infantry Regiment
  • 151st Infantry Regiment
  • Battle of Dutch Harbor
  • Camp Taji
  • Akutan Zero

Is there some minimum number required to avoid the Tag?Damon.cluck (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Couple of suggestions

[edit]

G'day, Damon. I've finished formating the citations now and have done a bit of a copy edit on the article. Can you please check to see that I haven't mucked anything up with the formatting? Apologies if I have. Anyway, a couple of suggestions I have for further improvement to take it up to a B class standard are:

  • expand the lead;
  • add more inline citations, i.e. for a B class assessment each paragraph should have at least one in line citation if not more and all information should be attributed to a source;
  • some of the sources might not be able to be classified as reliable third party sources. The commander's journals cited might be considered primary sources. If possible, these should probably be replaced with third party sources independent of the subject;
  • use consistent date format, probably "Month Day, Year" in this case as it tends to be the preferred format for US focused articles on Wikipedia;
  • values such as distances, measurements etc. can be formatted and converted using the {{convert}} template;
  • finally, I think the article probably could do with a good copy edit from someone fresh to it. In some places the prose doesn't quite flow as it might otherwise. I suspect that this is possibly because it is written by someone trained to write in a military style (I myself suffer from this, so I have trouble fixing these issues). If possible maybe someone who has not been tainted by dargens might be able to help (a peer review might be a way to enlist said person).

Anyway, well done so far. Keep up the good work, sir ;-) — AustralianRupert (talk) 15:48, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help and the review, I will start working these issues!Damon.cluck (talk) 03:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a quick look and made a few tweaks. Looks quite good, but I wasn't able to read the whole article unfortunately. I'm quite busy offline at the moment. Regardless, I think it is coming along quite well. I added a few "citation needed tags". If you can add citations where I've placed these tags, I feel it will meet the referencing criteria for a B class rating. Well done and keep up the good work. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

This article is looking really good. I would suggest developing some sort of plan to increase the internal links to this page. Good pages are reviewed most often, when their are many links to the page. If you look at http://stats.grok.se/en/201006/206th_Field_Artillery_Regiment_%28United_States%29, you will see what I mean about low traffic. Article looks good though, I would suggest polishing it a little and moving it towards A-class or GA review. Sadads (talk) 18:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recommendations

[edit]

The article looks pretty good. I would recommend taking this article through one of the more rigorous review processed before FA such as WP:GA or Milhist's A-class review. I think the main thing that they will be brought up will be ensuring that you don't have too much explicit interpretative Original research. The reviewers will be much more picky then I am, Sadads (talk) 20:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Aleutian06 (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 206th Field Artillery Regiment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 206th Field Artillery Regiment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on 206th Field Artillery Regiment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:54, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:206th_Field_Artillery_Regiment&oldid=1196965609"