Talk:Battle of Trois-Rivières/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Specific concerns
- Lead feels a bit skimpy. Suggest adding a sentence about the background to the battle, why were the American's in Quebec in the first place?
- When did Sullivan take command?
- Neither of these is enough to hold back GA status. I've taken the liberty of doing a light copyedit. The prose is still a bit clunky at places, if your goal is FAC, I strongly suggest a peer review. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the positive review! I know I've got a date on Sullivan's arrival somewhere, I'll put it in (that whole situation was an awful, disorganized, mess, and not all that well documented, but I know that date exists). As for why they were there, I thought the first sentence of the second lead paragraph answered that; I can probably make it more explicit, though. Magic♪piano 14:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)