Talk:Battle of Kunersdorf/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

• Lead and infobox;
  • 41,000 Russians and 24,000 Austrians "respectively"
  • No need to cite the info in the infobox because it is just a representation of already cited data in the prose this is a debatable change, and I'll leave it this way until the MH standard changes.
• Section 1;
  • Frankfurt an der Oder; in lead it is "Frankfurt (Oder)", be consistent fixed
• Section 2;
  • suited itself well to defense; is a bit awkward and confusing, reword fixed
  • south-west, north east, south east, south-east; be consistent, use hyphenation or just leave it. Fix through the article fixed
  • Why italics for "all" in "that all the Allies"? Frederick thought that he would face a few, not all emphasis
  • army around to the south east This way; a full stop after "south east" fixed
• Section 3;
  • 2 a.m. -> 2:00 am, per MOS:TIME fixed
  • redeployment is a single wordfixed
  • 11:30 , am or pm?, format per MOS:TIMEfixed
  • 80 enemy cannon -> 80 enemy cannons
  • Who is Prince Henry?fixed
• Section 3.1;
  • rank or title of Friedrich Wilhelm von Seydlitz?fixed
  • Cossacks is over linkedfixed
  • last-ditch effort; it is not a standard dictionary word, better use general wording Merriam webster, Cambridge, Columbia, and in thesauruses.
  • led an Austrian and Russian horse counter-attack; this is a bit confusing, did he uses horses to counter or what? make it clearer ok, but general use for cavalry is "horse"

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 15:31, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Section 4;
  • they participated in the Battle of Maxen; did they win the battle? mention that moved to footnote
  • Cossack and Carl Heinrich von Wedel; they are over-linked fixed
  • Lieutenant General August Frederick von Itzenplitz(5 September); care the spacing fixed'fixed'
  • The crushing defeat fixed (although sources say"crushing")
  • Henry? What was his full name, any rank, title, position? and link fixed
  • her nephew; mention the full name fixed
• Section 5; all good
• 3.8% confidence, violation unlikely

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 23:49, 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) 02:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.