Talk:Battle of Garnett's & Golding's Farms/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 20:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sturmvogel 66: responded to your comments below and beefed up the Battle section a bit. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 01:31, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No DABs.
External links OK.
Really need a map or at least a photo; preferably the former.
- I haven't been able to find a map. This is a pretty minor engagement; the big action happened at Gaines's Mill.
  - True, but even a general map of the area would be useful to orient the reader.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Union's twenty-three, well-positioned artillery silenced the Confederates's ten guns situated in an open field. This is awkward.
- Reworded
  - Better, but still a couple of problems. Delete the first comma as unnecessary and "withstood" is a strange choice given that they won that artillery duel. How about "dominated" instead?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You tell the reader 3 times that the attack convinced McClellan that he was being attacked from both sides, once in the lede and twice in the main body. Get rid of the mention in the battle section.
- Good catch. Done.
  - Same thing with The action at the Garnett farm accomplished little.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's a curious lack of detail about the infantry fighting, if any. Did the Confederates actually try and storm the Union positions? Or was it mostly just an artillery bombardment?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Mostly an artillery bombardment.
Couple of new, minor problems: The was a lull--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
again at a battlefield near the Golding house Clean this up; by its nature any place where two opponents fight is a battlefield.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jones, suspected that the Federals near the house were withdrawing, and authorized a Fix this as well--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
However, Toombs once again turned a reconnaissance operation into an full engagement. His outfit, along with that of fellow commander George T. Anderson, advanced. Before Toombs could be countermanded, the Confederates had already been repelled. The repulse, like the day before, had been delivered by Baldy Smith's IV Corps. This is awkward as the first two sentences could profitably be combined and the third should be tweaked for readability. We already know that Smith is commanding IV Corps, no need to tell us again. I think that you might have been a bit hasty in publishing your revisions in light of my comments; it's always worth spending an extra minute or two to proofread your writing before uploading it. Often, I've found through experience, it's most needed when you think that you're only revising a couple of sentences.
Only give a person's first name on first mention, after that just use the last name. I fixed one time when you did this, but I'm sure that there are others.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Sturmvogel 66: I believe I've corrected the above errors. Some of them were cringe-worthy; I've proofread this time. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 01:48, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]