Talk:German Prisoner of War Camp, Hoopeston, Illinois

Military history: European / German / North America / United States / World War II Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

References and a couple other things

It looks like now the references are a little broken. You've got refs listed as numbers, but not what the source is. What you should do in these ref tags is something like this: <ref>Miller, E: ''The Sun'', page 23. Academic Press, 2005.</ref>. The Wikipedia software will automatically tag the actual text with a footnote number that refers back down to a citation list at the bottom. Try it out, you'll see how it works.

Also I edited the top so that it more directly refers to the subject of the article, which is this specific POW camp, not the town itself. I basically just moved things around a little so that it talks about the camp itself, then comes back down to the need for the camp. I also linked it up to a couple of other articles, so take a look at how I did that so you can get a feel for it. I've also now linked this article off the page for Hoopeston, Illinois, in the history section. — e. ripley\^talk 12:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for editing and ref tags. It is greatly appreciated.Chicks14 (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the above comments, the "references" have still been left as just numbers. For now I have removed them: if you have real references please restore them, but give details, as shown above by E. Ripley, not just as numbers not linking anywhere. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:25, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When this person initially made the article they listed a real list of sources (not properly formatted and with no inline footnotes, but they are sources). I've restored them for now, they're better than nothing. — e. ripley\^talk 12:27, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping restore the article. Boy, is this a learning process!!! Thank goodness for editors that help.Chicks14 (talk) 14:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]