(Redirected from
Talk:Big Stick Ideology/GA1)
Review
OK, I usually just add comments and help complete it as well.
I did a minor copy edit myself. Things we need to do...
- We need to fix the positioning of the sources. They should all really come at the end of the full sentence. Some people put them after the comma but I'm not a fan of that either. They really should come at the end of the sentence like I said. If the source is meant to be for a specific word or part of the sentence but quote marks around that part and then add the source at the end of the sentence.
- For example, Historians viewed Roosevelt as "a very mean bully" before he became emperor of the world.[5] — Realist 2 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- There needs to be better formatting of the notes. Current note #2 by "Beale 1957" is good. The author and year are wikilinked and the page numbers are normal written. However notes like #4 and #5 are different. The page number has been included in the blue linking. It doesn't even clearly identify a page number as it has no "p.". Try to get all notes formatted like #2. — Realist 2 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Was the Beale book written in 1957 or 1956? The notes section and references section give different dates. — Realist 2 17:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- In the notes section you have used "Bermann 1986, p. 149" yet I can't see this book in the references section. — Realist 2 17:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Current note #14 this, is unreliable for wikipedia, Answers.com isn't considered reliable, I'm sure we can find a better source though. — Realist 2 17:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Roosevelt's prolific reading habits. - Is the word prolific an opinion? If so, put the word prolific between quotes "prolific". It might be nice to say who called it "prolific". — Realist 2 17:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Roosevelt was quite bigoted, and most historians since the 1970s have summarized that the corollary was influenced by Roosevelt's personal beliefs as well.[15][16] - Here you really need to establish who believes he is a bigot and make it clear that it is an opinion, not necessarily a fact (I don't know anything about the guy to comment lol). — Realist 2 17:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I think that's everything. Let's get this sorted , I'll give it a second look and it should be good. —
Realist
2
18:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, everything seems done to me (you should have called me, I don't bite :-)), I'll read over it one more time and then hopefully it's ready. —
Realist
2
02:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Passed, well done. — Realist 2 02:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, everything seems done to me (you should have called me, I don't bite :-)), I'll read over it one more time and then hopefully it's ready. —
Realist
2
02:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I think that's everything. Let's get this sorted , I'll give it a second look and it should be good. —
Realist
2
18:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
(Redirected from
Talk:Big Stick Ideology/GA1)
Review
OK, I usually just add comments and help complete it as well.
I did a minor copy edit myself. Things we need to do...
- We need to fix the positioning of the sources. They should all really come at the end of the full sentence. Some people put them after the comma but I'm not a fan of that either. They really should come at the end of the sentence like I said. If the source is meant to be for a specific word or part of the sentence but quote marks around that part and then add the source at the end of the sentence.
- For example, Historians viewed Roosevelt as "a very mean bully" before he became emperor of the world.[5] — Realist 2 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- There needs to be better formatting of the notes. Current note #2 by "Beale 1957" is good. The author and year are wikilinked and the page numbers are normal written. However notes like #4 and #5 are different. The page number has been included in the blue linking. It doesn't even clearly identify a page number as it has no "p.". Try to get all notes formatted like #2. — Realist 2 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Was the Beale book written in 1957 or 1956? The notes section and references section give different dates. — Realist 2 17:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- In the notes section you have used "Bermann 1986, p. 149" yet I can't see this book in the references section. — Realist 2 17:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Current note #14 this, is unreliable for wikipedia, Answers.com isn't considered reliable, I'm sure we can find a better source though. — Realist 2 17:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Roosevelt's prolific reading habits. - Is the word prolific an opinion? If so, put the word prolific between quotes "prolific". It might be nice to say who called it "prolific". — Realist 2 17:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Roosevelt was quite bigoted, and most historians since the 1970s have summarized that the corollary was influenced by Roosevelt's personal beliefs as well.[15][16] - Here you really need to establish who believes he is a bigot and make it clear that it is an opinion, not necessarily a fact (I don't know anything about the guy to comment lol). — Realist 2 17:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I think that's everything. Let's get this sorted , I'll give it a second look and it should be good. —
Realist
2
18:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, everything seems done to me (you should have called me, I don't bite :-)), I'll read over it one more time and then hopefully it's ready. —
Realist
2
02:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Passed, well done. — Realist 2 02:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, everything seems done to me (you should have called me, I don't bite :-)), I'll read over it one more time and then hopefully it's ready. —
Realist
2
02:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I think that's everything. Let's get this sorted , I'll give it a second look and it should be good. —
Realist
2
18:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)