Talk:2nd Cavalry Division (United Kingdom)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2nd Cavalry Division (United Kingdom) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: British / European / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War I task force

Improvements

I have completed the B class checklist and believe that it is a Start class article because it fails criteria 2 and 3. I believe that the article could be improved by addressing the following issues:

Date style: the article uses two different styles for the dates, one with the month followed by the day and another with the day followed by the month - it doesn't matter what style is uses, so long as it is consistent;
Coverage: the article could be expanded to discuss the major actions that the Division was involved in. Also, the article doesn't provide a date on which the Division was formed, although it does state when it disbanded;
References: there are an appropriate amount of in line citations, but would it be possible to include a number of hardcopy sources also, this would serve to improve the verifiability of the article;
Structure: the article has a lead section, but in reality after that it is a list, so it needs at least one or more sections of prose. Also, the addition of a Notes section (for in line citations), References for hardcopy sources, External links for websites and See also sections would serve to provide readers with more resources about the subject;
Supporting materials: whilst the article has an infobox and therefore meets criteria 5, it would be improved by adding a couple of images also.

Just a few ideas. When you feel that the article is ready for re-assessment, please add it to the list at WP:MHA. You might also consider taking it to peer review if you want to take it beyond B class. This can be done by adding it to the list at WP:MHPR. Hope this helps. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]