![]() | Government Army (Bohemia and Moravia) 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. Review: February 25, 2018. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | A fact from Government Army (Bohemia and Moravia) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 14 November 2017 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Zawed ( talk · contribs) 01:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I will review this one, comments to follow in the next few days. Cheers, Zawed ( talk) 01:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Content/Style
References
Other stuff
I have completed my initial review. Further comments may follow depending on any changes made in response to my comments. Will check back in a few days. Cheers. Zawed ( talk) 09:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
To check as many errors as possible in the references and/or notes, I recommend using User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck in conjunction with two other scripts. You can install them as follows:
importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js');
to
Special:MyPage/common.js .importScript('User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck.js');
. Save that page..citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */
.When you've added all those, go to an article to check for various messages in its notes and references. (You may need to clear your browser's cache first). The output of User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck is not foolproof and can be verbose. Use common sense when interpreting output (especially with respect to sorting errors). Reading the explanatory page will help more than a little. The least urgent message of all is probably Missing archive link; archiving weblinks is good practice but lack of archiving will probably not be mentioned in any content review. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 04:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | Government Army (Bohemia and Moravia) 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. Review: February 25, 2018. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | A fact from Government Army (Bohemia and Moravia) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 14 November 2017 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Zawed ( talk · contribs) 01:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I will review this one, comments to follow in the next few days. Cheers, Zawed ( talk) 01:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Content/Style
References
Other stuff
I have completed my initial review. Further comments may follow depending on any changes made in response to my comments. Will check back in a few days. Cheers. Zawed ( talk) 09:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
To check as many errors as possible in the references and/or notes, I recommend using User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck in conjunction with two other scripts. You can install them as follows:
importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js');
to
Special:MyPage/common.js .importScript('User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck.js');
. Save that page..citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */
.When you've added all those, go to an article to check for various messages in its notes and references. (You may need to clear your browser's cache first). The output of User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck is not foolproof and can be verbose. Use common sense when interpreting output (especially with respect to sorting errors). Reading the explanatory page will help more than a little. The least urgent message of all is probably Missing archive link; archiving weblinks is good practice but lack of archiving will probably not be mentioned in any content review. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 04:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)