Wikipedia:Peer review/76th Infantry Division (United Kingdom)/archive1

76th Infantry Division (United Kingdom)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review as it has been overhauled from a stub and i am looking to take it through a GA review in the near future. Regards EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 03:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting ... sporadic, in this case. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 02:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much Dank, much appreciated as always.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Use a consistent variety of English - you've got "re-organisation" in the lead but then "reorganization" later in the article

Thats what you get when you get an English guy living in the US using a US-ENG word processor :) fixed!EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful about overusing passive voice

Not my strong suit, examples would need to be highlighted, sorry.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Churchill ref (footnote 5) currently doesn't link properly. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed, thank you for time and comments.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: G'day, nice work.

I made a few tweaks, please check that you are happy with these changes. I have the following other suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 09:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the first sentence in the Deception section seems a bit abrupt
in the References, some of the works have publisher locations, but others don't. For A-class and higher, this should be consistent. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in responding, I have not been that active recently. Like the changes. I will make amendments per your suggestions.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]