The contents of the Music history of the United States during the Civil War era page were merged into Music of the American Civil War on February 25, 2012. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Music of the American Civil War has been listed as one of the Music 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. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
October 22, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
American Civil War saw
buglers (infantry band pictured) required to learn
forty-nine separate calls for infantry alone? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I know quite a bit of them; should the Stonewall Brigade Band, "the nation's oldest continuous community band sponsored by local government and funded by tax monies," receive a mention? Cake ( talk) 05:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Anyone have any ideas how to divide this into sections?-- Gen. Bedford his Forest 10:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Can we add the unofficial, official (where appropriate) and popularised anthems of union and confederacy for clarity? Ginister ( talk) 21:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this article using the GA Criteria. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions during the process please let me know. I'll be back with my initial readthrough and thoughts of the article. -- Banime ( talk) 00:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
In my initial readthrough, I checked for the basic problems and criteria. The article contains reliable sources, the topic is not treated in an obviously non-neutral way, there are no cleanup banners, and it is not about a current event. The projects it is in have rated it Start Class and C Class, which is slightly concerning, but its possible that it has not been reviewed recently. Article seems very stable and there are not any edit wars to speak of. Also, one large thing I noticed that will need definite improvement is the lead needs expansion. I see no reason for a quick fail, and I will now go much more in depth in my review. -- Banime ( talk) 00:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm back with my complete review. I will use the GA Criteria as a guideline for my review to help with making improvements and focusing on what needs fixing. I also made a few fixes myself, which you can see by checking the edit history.
Overall the article had some well written parts. The main concerns are listed above. Work on improving the general prose of the article as well and making it flow better. Addressing the concerns above will help towards that as well. I will put the article on hold for about a week or until these concerns are addressed, then make the final decision. I believe it can be improved sufficiently to attain GA status. Also, I welcome more comments from other reviewers to help with the article's improvement. Good work -- Banime ( talk) 14:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I have decided to pass this article as a GA in accordance with the GA Criteria. All of my concerns above have been met. I'd like to thank Kresock for helping in the review, as well as Bedford and 8th Ohio Volunteers for helping to get the article ready. To further improve the article, please look at improving the prose and ensuring the lead meets WP:LEAD as that is often the hardest part of any article. If you have questions please ask, and thank you for all of your hard work. Good luck on future edits. -- Banime ( talk) 16:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
A few things that you might want to look at for further improvements:
The contents of the Music history of the United States during the Civil War era page were merged into Music of the American Civil War on February 25, 2012. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Music of the American Civil War has been listed as one of the Music 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. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
October 22, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
American Civil War saw
buglers (infantry band pictured) required to learn
forty-nine separate calls for infantry alone? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I know quite a bit of them; should the Stonewall Brigade Band, "the nation's oldest continuous community band sponsored by local government and funded by tax monies," receive a mention? Cake ( talk) 05:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Anyone have any ideas how to divide this into sections?-- Gen. Bedford his Forest 10:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Can we add the unofficial, official (where appropriate) and popularised anthems of union and confederacy for clarity? Ginister ( talk) 21:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this article using the GA Criteria. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions during the process please let me know. I'll be back with my initial readthrough and thoughts of the article. -- Banime ( talk) 00:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
In my initial readthrough, I checked for the basic problems and criteria. The article contains reliable sources, the topic is not treated in an obviously non-neutral way, there are no cleanup banners, and it is not about a current event. The projects it is in have rated it Start Class and C Class, which is slightly concerning, but its possible that it has not been reviewed recently. Article seems very stable and there are not any edit wars to speak of. Also, one large thing I noticed that will need definite improvement is the lead needs expansion. I see no reason for a quick fail, and I will now go much more in depth in my review. -- Banime ( talk) 00:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm back with my complete review. I will use the GA Criteria as a guideline for my review to help with making improvements and focusing on what needs fixing. I also made a few fixes myself, which you can see by checking the edit history.
Overall the article had some well written parts. The main concerns are listed above. Work on improving the general prose of the article as well and making it flow better. Addressing the concerns above will help towards that as well. I will put the article on hold for about a week or until these concerns are addressed, then make the final decision. I believe it can be improved sufficiently to attain GA status. Also, I welcome more comments from other reviewers to help with the article's improvement. Good work -- Banime ( talk) 14:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
I have decided to pass this article as a GA in accordance with the GA Criteria. All of my concerns above have been met. I'd like to thank Kresock for helping in the review, as well as Bedford and 8th Ohio Volunteers for helping to get the article ready. To further improve the article, please look at improving the prose and ensuring the lead meets WP:LEAD as that is often the hardest part of any article. If you have questions please ask, and thank you for all of your hard work. Good luck on future edits. -- Banime ( talk) 16:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
A few things that you might want to look at for further improvements: