Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of the Bowling Alley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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.
Promoted EyeSerenetalk 08:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
| Toolbox |
|---|
I am nominating this article for A-Class review. —Ed!(talk) 03:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CommentSupport- No dab links, all external links check out and all images have alt text (no action required);
- Citation check tool reveals no errors (no action required either);
- I've made a few changes so please check and revert if required;
- They look good, thanks. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First sentence in the Taegu section is a little repeatative: "In the meantime, Eighth Army commander Lieutenant General Walton Walker had established Taegu as the Eighth Army's headquarters". Maybe reword as such: "In the meantime Taegu was established as the Eight Army's headquarters, under the command of Lieutenant General Walton Walker" or something similar;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should "mid-august" be capitalised (i.e. mid-August)? (US forces assemble section);- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure 'Carpet bombing campaign' needs to be capitalised (Deadlock section);- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Use of the term 'enemy' needs to be avoided (August 18 attack);- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The following sentence seems a little awkward: "The tanks and self-propelled guns, firing rapidly, approached the American positions." Perhaps it could be reworded to: "The tanks and self-propelled guns approached the American positions, firing rapidly.";- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Figures less than 10 should be written in full i.e. five not 5 per WP:MOSNUM (see Aftermath section);and- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In places you refer to "Colonel Michaelis"; AFAIK once the individual has been introduced at the first instance with his full name and rank he should then only be referred to by his last name, i.e. Michaelis (not sure of the MOS reference for that though). Anotherclown (talk) 06:05, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]- I think I have fixed all instances of this. I have addressed all of your comments. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Cheers. Striking all comments and adding my support now. Well done IMO. Anotherclown (talk) 22:03, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I have fixed all instances of this. I have addressed all of your comments. —Ed!(talk) 16:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:Support:in the lead, "What followed was a fierce series of battles..." or "What followed was a series of fierce battles..."?- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 22:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the lead, abbreviations of ROK, UN, US etc should be formally introduced, e.g. "Republic of Korea (ROK)";- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 22:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the infobox, there is no strength value for the UN forces, I suggest adding "Unknown" as a placeholder;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 22:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the abbreviation "NK" should be formally introduced before being used in a heading;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 22:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the US forces assemble section, "platoon" could be wikilinked on first mention (same for company, division, battalion, batteries etc. where appropriate);- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 22:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the NK forces assemble section, "the poplar-lined Taegu-Sangju road ran" there should be an endash per WP:DASH;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the August 18 attack section, "...directed this artillery fire on the North Koreans with a T-34 tank within 50 yards (46 m) of his position" - reword to "in a T-34 tank" perhaps - otherwise it sounds like Millett directed fire with a tank rather than on it;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the Stalemate section (and others), "120-mm. mortar shells" - not sure about the presentation here with the hyphen and full stop, I think the MOS would say it should be "120 mm" (using a non breaking space);- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the Stalemate "antitank" or "anti-tank" - not sure if the first is US English or not, but it doesn't quite look right to me (I might be wrong, though);- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the August 21 attack section, the first two sentences start with "That evening" or "Later that evening" - is there a way to reword so that there is some variation?- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the NK flanking moves section, "UN planes..." might sound better as "UN aircraft...";- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the NK flanking moves section, "main supply road" or "main supply route"? (the later has an article that could be linked);- Fixed. 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
in the NK flanking moves section, "13 76-mm guns emplaced..." this the numerical values here are difficult to read, the MOS would allow "thirteen 76 mm" here, which would make it easier on the eye;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the NK flanking moves section, I suggest wikilink "commissioned" to "Officer (armed forces)";- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the Final moves section, "US 23rd Regiment" should this be "23rd Infantry" - as this is how they are previously referred to?- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the Aftermath, "The North Korean's total casualties..." the apostrophe is in the wrong place, I think. It should be "...North Koreans' total..." because it is plural here;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the Aftermath, there is a mixture of presentation style for dates, for example "18 to 25 August" as opposed to August 12–25". Either Day Month Year or Month Day, Year is fine, but consistency is required;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the References, if possible, location details could be added to the works;- Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
in the References, the 2010 Millett work should have an endash for the year range.AustralianRupert (talk) 05:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]- Fixed. I have responded to everything. —Ed!(talk) 23:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- Coverage, prose, referencing, structure and supporting materials look good -- well done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support the intro and first section, which I just copyedited. - Dank (push to talk) 04:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.