Battle of Kyongju has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 3, 2011 Good article nominee Listed

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Asian / Korean / North America / United States / Cold War 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 Associated task forces: /  Asian military history task force Korean military history task force North American military history task force United States military history task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) Korea High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated working groups: /  This article is supported by the Korean military history task force. This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea. United States High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Cold War High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Kyongju/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WikiCopter ( ♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 20:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply

• Comments
  • I dunno what's up with the flagicons and unit names in the Location field of the infobox, but they belong in the Units field.
    • Fixed. — Ed! ^(talk) 20:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC) reply
  • South Korea is either always ROK, Republic of Korea or South Korea; pick one. Same with North Korea/North Koreans. WikiCopter ( ♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 20:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply
    • I've drawn a more clear connection between them to establish they are the same, but I've never heard anyone have a problem with the different terms; they refer to the same thing. — Ed! ^(talk) 20:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC) reply
      • Consistency, Ed.
        • Fixed. — Ed! ^(talk) 20:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC) reply
  • Give ROK commanders, Aussie units and commanders.
    • ROK Commanders given, and Australian unit given but I can't find anything on the commander. — Ed! ^(talk) 20:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC) reply
  • Give breakdown of losses. WikiCopter ( ♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 17:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC) reply
    • The exact numbers are impossible to determine, particularly for the North and South Korean troops, because records were so poor. — Ed! ^(talk) 20:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC) reply
      • I meant give numbers for missing, KIA and POWs. Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup| former
  • Now the AUS and US units are on the same line, but that is easily fixed. Passed. Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup| former 19:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply