Talk:Battle of Kay/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 02:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

• Lead and infobox;
  • Link "Count" in "Count Pyotr Saltykov" done
• Section 1;
  • Link Berlin done
  • Reword the complete last sentence as "Frederick tried to counter the Russian by sending an army corps, commanded by Friedrich August von Finck, and a second column commanded by Christoph II von Dohna", because the the King did not successfully counter the Russians, it was just an attempt done
  • Link Poznan done
  • frontier river Kwisa, or Queis -> frontier river Kwisa (German: Queis)
  • From there Count Leopold Joseph von Daun; just link the name, not along with the title done
  • north west toward -> north west towards toward is correct
  • commanded by András Hadik -> commanded by Count András Hadik
• Section 2;
  • Link Empress Elizabeth done
  • but more realistic ones suggest; the word "realistic" is vague, you really don't know which figure is the real one. So better to reword deleting the word.done
  • Russians at down the next day; I think it is to be "dawn" not "down" done
  • Be consistent on using comma (,) after mentioning the date. In some case (On 20 July Saltykov had moved.....) and in some (On 23 July, Wedel ordered a reconnaissance....). Both are acceptable formats but consistency is the key. Fix a format for the article.
• Section 3; all good
• Section 4;
  • In the second assault, Manteufel was injured; In the second para of the section 3; you said that he was injured in the initial attack, was he injured again? Did he not abandon after the first injury? make it clearer
  • Can the position of General Moritz Franz Kasimir von Wobersnow be obtained? I mean what he commanded etc. I don't think so. I've not found it yet.
  • In the lead; it is mentioned that Russian losses were less than 5,000, what about "Russian losses at over 7,000" Frederick said losses at 7,000.
• I suggest you to add the image of Pyotr Saltykov from his article done
• 0% confidence, violation unlikely, well done.

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:44, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

---

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC)