Talk:J. Johnston Pettigrew/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 20:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have done a little copy editing which you will want to check.

"Pettigrew served in the army of the Confederate States of America" "Pettigrew" → 'He'.

Done

"mortally wounded during an Union attack during the Confederate retreat" "during" twice in five words; possibly tweak one?

Rephrased

Could we have his date of birth in the article?

Added

"would later become a Major General" Lower case initial letters for major general.

Fixed, and fixed another instance with brigadier general later in the article

"writing a book about the culture of Spain titled "Notes on Spain and the Spaniards in the Summer of 1859, With a Glance at Sardinia" Book titles should be in italics, not quote marks.

Done

"Originally commanding a brigade" Could we specify "Originally"? I assume you mean at the start of the battle, but that is not clear.

Rephrased, is the new version clearer?

"because of his lack of military experience. Despite his lack of military experience. A little clunky; maybe replace the second "his lack of military experience" with 'this'?

Changed to "despite this inexperience"

" Pettigrew was left on the field, as his wounds were believed to be mortal. Left for dead on the field" Similar to above.

Fixed

Sadly not. It is now worse.

Maybe 'However' instead of the second "left for dead on the field"?

Changed the second "left for dead" to "However, he"

"File:Portrait of General James Johnston Pettigrew.jpg" needs a US PD tag.

Done

"File:Pettigrew 01.jpg" Optional: any chance you could clarify the monument's location in the image's description?

Description in Commons indicates Bunker Hill, West Virginia, which a Google search backs up. I added the location to the caption

Thanks for taking this one on. I did this one late at night, so there's possibly some stuff I just totally forgot with this one. Hog Farm (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"On July 3, 1863, Gen. Lee selected Pettigrew's division'' to march at the left of Maj. Gen. George Pickett's in the famous infantry assault popularly known as Pickett's Charge (sometimes called the "Pickett-Pettigrew-Trimble Assault", as Pickett's division was not the only one to participate in the charge). Pettigrew's brigade had been roughly handled on the first day of the battle, and was not in good condition for the charge.

Pettigrew's division ... " A "division" either side of one "brigade". Is that deliberate?

Yes, and I clarified. Is it better now? Confederate brigades and divisions were known only by the name of the unit's commander, which caused confusion in battle once people became hors de combat. This also caused issues, both during the war and for historians when people had similar names, like the time John R. Jones was relived of command for cowardice and replaced by John M. Jones. Hog Farm (talk) 21:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I queried it because it was discombobulating enough to cause me doubts. I think that the phraseology is clearer and smoother now.

Fine work. If this is what you can do when half asleep, your best must be impressive indeed. Promoting. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:47, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed