![]() | Joint Expedition Against Franklin 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am working on this article. It will not be a stub when i am done! Thank you for the hard work tagging the articles. Chris Kreider 16:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
For help in referencing, you can use the {{ cite web}} template. Also see WP:CITE for more information about in-line referencing. - SpLoT / ( talk) 17:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I see there are still some documents and reports which are not in the correct format. Try using other {{ cite}} templates from WP:CITET. As a last alternative, you can use http://citationmachine.net/ to reference. - SpLoT / ( talk) 18:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Not only is this article a stub, it borrows from Hamersheim's History anthology without ANY credit given and uses templates copied from other more credible wiki pages —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cup of Asclepius ( talk • contribs) 23:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
I can't speak for the previous version of the article with regards to sourcing and/or accuracy. After speaking with Chrislk02 ( talk · contribs) with regards to the sourcing originally used to build the article (see here), I scoured it and others before ensuring everything in the article was duly cited to a source I included in the article as you see it now. I'm not familiar with "Hamersheim's History anthology" (nor, apparently, is Google [1]), but if you could provide more information about it, I'd be happy to vet its reliability for inclusion in the article. Cheers. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 07:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer ( talk) 23:32, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
A couple of minor MOS and image issues, but the main thing is the referencing and heavy dependence upon one source. I will be watchlisting this page - please leave your responses/questions on this page. Thanks! Dana boomer ( talk) 23:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
That being said, I would like to inquire about your mention of "a lot of white space in the article." The last image (of the Whitehead) does progress into the "Outcome" section, but it doesn't seem to be creating any undue formatting problems therein. Is it perchance extending into the "References" section for you (based on your browser's resolution) and causing problems there? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 00:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help)So sorry I didn't get to it, I'm still recovering from a virus I was dealing with all weekend, so I'm glad to hand it off if you don't mind making the best of it. I'll still help out with working on it, but now I have my virus and schoolwork to contend with for the next few days, and don't know how much concerted Wikiing I'll be doing. Thanks for the offer! — pd_THOR | =/\= | 16:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
← I am knee deep in school work too. maybye we should pull this out of GA consideration until I have time to expand it? Chris lk02 Chris Kreider 18:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I've taken another look through the article, made a couple of minor prose changes, and now declare the article of GA status. The addition of the information on the Confederate movements much improves the broadness of the article. One minor comment (which doesn't affect the GA status) is that there are a lot of red links in the article. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, any links which lead to subjects that are probably not notable enough to have their own article in the future should probably be removed. Other than that, the article looks good! Dana boomer ( talk) 02:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joint Expedition against Franklin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Joint Expedition Against Franklin 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am working on this article. It will not be a stub when i am done! Thank you for the hard work tagging the articles. Chris Kreider 16:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
For help in referencing, you can use the {{ cite web}} template. Also see WP:CITE for more information about in-line referencing. - SpLoT / ( talk) 17:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I see there are still some documents and reports which are not in the correct format. Try using other {{ cite}} templates from WP:CITET. As a last alternative, you can use http://citationmachine.net/ to reference. - SpLoT / ( talk) 18:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Not only is this article a stub, it borrows from Hamersheim's History anthology without ANY credit given and uses templates copied from other more credible wiki pages —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cup of Asclepius ( talk • contribs) 23:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
I can't speak for the previous version of the article with regards to sourcing and/or accuracy. After speaking with Chrislk02 ( talk · contribs) with regards to the sourcing originally used to build the article (see here), I scoured it and others before ensuring everything in the article was duly cited to a source I included in the article as you see it now. I'm not familiar with "Hamersheim's History anthology" (nor, apparently, is Google [1]), but if you could provide more information about it, I'd be happy to vet its reliability for inclusion in the article. Cheers. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 07:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer ( talk) 23:32, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
A couple of minor MOS and image issues, but the main thing is the referencing and heavy dependence upon one source. I will be watchlisting this page - please leave your responses/questions on this page. Thanks! Dana boomer ( talk) 23:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
That being said, I would like to inquire about your mention of "a lot of white space in the article." The last image (of the Whitehead) does progress into the "Outcome" section, but it doesn't seem to be creating any undue formatting problems therein. Is it perchance extending into the "References" section for you (based on your browser's resolution) and causing problems there? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 00:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help)So sorry I didn't get to it, I'm still recovering from a virus I was dealing with all weekend, so I'm glad to hand it off if you don't mind making the best of it. I'll still help out with working on it, but now I have my virus and schoolwork to contend with for the next few days, and don't know how much concerted Wikiing I'll be doing. Thanks for the offer! — pd_THOR | =/\= | 16:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
← I am knee deep in school work too. maybye we should pull this out of GA consideration until I have time to expand it? Chris lk02 Chris Kreider 18:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I've taken another look through the article, made a couple of minor prose changes, and now declare the article of GA status. The addition of the information on the Confederate movements much improves the broadness of the article. One minor comment (which doesn't affect the GA status) is that there are a lot of red links in the article. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, any links which lead to subjects that are probably not notable enough to have their own article in the future should probably be removed. Other than that, the article looks good! Dana boomer ( talk) 02:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joint Expedition against Franklin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)