This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
March of the Iron Will article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | March of the Iron Will was nominated as a Warfare good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 9, 2017). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 5, 2012, May 5, 2014, May 5, 2017, May 5, 2019, and May 5, 2021. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on March of the Iron Will. 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) 21:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
G'day, a bunch of "citation needed" tags is going to be a quickfail in a GA review. I suggest interested editors add citations for the uncited material before someone decides to review it and it gets failed. Alternatively, withdraw the GA nom. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Generally speaking, this article seems to have a pretty unencyclopedic tone to me. It reads almost like a "historic novelization" throughout much of it, with all sorts of florid adjectives and purple prose and whatnot. Here are some specific instances that especially stood out to me (but it feels this way in general to me, not just with these specifics):
I'm not sure if I'm just overreacting, and in any case I don't really know what, if anything, is supposed to be done in cases like this, so I'm just writing this here on the talk page, and will soon add a "tone" template to the article. -- Rwv37 ( talk) 03:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
March of the Iron Will article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | March of the Iron Will was nominated as a Warfare good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 9, 2017). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 5, 2012, May 5, 2014, May 5, 2017, May 5, 2019, and May 5, 2021. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on March of the Iron Will. 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) 21:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
G'day, a bunch of "citation needed" tags is going to be a quickfail in a GA review. I suggest interested editors add citations for the uncited material before someone decides to review it and it gets failed. Alternatively, withdraw the GA nom. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Generally speaking, this article seems to have a pretty unencyclopedic tone to me. It reads almost like a "historic novelization" throughout much of it, with all sorts of florid adjectives and purple prose and whatnot. Here are some specific instances that especially stood out to me (but it feels this way in general to me, not just with these specifics):
I'm not sure if I'm just overreacting, and in any case I don't really know what, if anything, is supposed to be done in cases like this, so I'm just writing this here on the talk page, and will soon add a "tone" template to the article. -- Rwv37 ( talk) 03:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)