Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reference to number USSR Divisions is misleading and should be deleted.
A full strength WW2 German-USA-UK division was approx. 20000.
USSR divisions were smaller, and the USSR did not lose anywhere near 52 divisions worth of troops by other armies' standards in the operation.
Best to give USSR casualty numbers without mentioning the term "division".
````NCDane —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
NCDane (
talk •
contribs)
04:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
This is my first GA Review in a while, so please bear with me! Here are my comments:
1. (a) Well written: Excellent, apart from a few bits and bobs:
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.: Pass!
2 Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout: Pass (b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; Nearly there, a few comments:
(c) it contains no original research: Pass!
3 Broad in its coverage:
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic: Pass! (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail: Pass!
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias: Pass!
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: Pass!
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images: Two Image problems:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Pass!
So, look at the images, look at some of the prose, and then I think this can be passed! Skinny87 ( talk) 19:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reference to number USSR Divisions is misleading and should be deleted.
A full strength WW2 German-USA-UK division was approx. 20000.
USSR divisions were smaller, and the USSR did not lose anywhere near 52 divisions worth of troops by other armies' standards in the operation.
Best to give USSR casualty numbers without mentioning the term "division".
````NCDane —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
NCDane (
talk •
contribs)
04:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
This is my first GA Review in a while, so please bear with me! Here are my comments:
1. (a) Well written: Excellent, apart from a few bits and bobs:
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.: Pass!
2 Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout: Pass (b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; Nearly there, a few comments:
(c) it contains no original research: Pass!
3 Broad in its coverage:
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic: Pass! (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail: Pass!
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias: Pass!
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: Pass!
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images: Two Image problems:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Pass!
So, look at the images, look at some of the prose, and then I think this can be passed! Skinny87 ( talk) 19:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)