A fact from Camp Nelson National Cemetery appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 January 2011 ( check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the remains of Confederate soldiers buried at Camp Nelson National Cemetery (pictured) were exhumed after the American Civil War and re-buried elsewhere? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/January.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Kentucky High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as High-importance). National Register of Historic Places High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Memorials / North America / United States / American Civil War This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military memorials and cemeteries task force North American military history task force United States military history task force American Civil War task force Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Cemeteries C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cemeteries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cemeteries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CemeteriesWikipedia:WikiProject CemeteriesTemplate:WikiProject CemeteriesCemeteries articles C This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article pretty much meets the B-class criteria, but there are a few things that I would like to see before upping that assessment.

1. I've marked a few items with {{ citation needed}} tags. While I wasn't overly thorough in my browsing, I did notice that the statements I marked didn't appear in any of the sources noted in the paragraph in which the sentence occurs. Specifically:
   1. The sources say that there were two CSA soldiers mistakenly buried here, but I didn't see anywhere that said specifically that they simply replaced the headstones.
   2. The map (reference #9) you cite in the "From Reconstruction to the present" section shows the additions, but it doesn't show the years you've asserted. I'd like to see references for those.
   3. The fact that the burial vaults are made out of recycled car batteries jumped out at me, and I think it's interesting, but I didn't see it in either of the vault sources. Another source is needed here.
2. The "Annual events" section relies entirely on a 2010 schedule of events. This by no means implies that they are "annual". Maybe some prior years' schedules could be included as well?
3. Are there any more notable interments here? If William Harris is the only person you can find, I would suggest merging this section into the History section. If more can be found, however, the list should be expanded.

While the citation issues are more relevant to bringing the article to GA-Class, the second two items are more vital to the article. If you can dig up some more information related to these two, I would be willing to increase this article to B-Class. Good work so far!-- Dudemanfellabra ( talk) 05:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply

I appreciate the points for improvement, and have taken action on most of them. Here are my thoughts:

1. Citation tags: Most were replaced with verified references. In some case, the in-text assertion could not be verified and so was deleted. On the specific items you mentioned:
   1. Years for renovation projects, reference found.
   2. Recycled car batteries - This is something I was told while working at the cemetery, but couldn't find anything to corroborate it, so I deleted it for being "hearsay". If it's true, then I suppose neither the government nor the manufacturer wants people to know that a loved one is being buried in melted-down car parts.
2. Annual events: The 2010 program mentions the "planning Memorial Day, Veterans Day... Ceremonies each year" in the acknowledgements. Also, the Josh Kegley article Memorial Day at Camp Nelson: Veterans' families take time to remember mentions "the yearly event" in connection with the 2010 ceremony and the 1,000 people that showed up. All the same, I referenced another article, from 1997, about the annual Memmorial Day Ceremony.
3. Notable Interments: There are no more that I know of. However, this may change soon, as I've heard (from a cemetery worker) that one of the Iraq War KIA is being nomninated for the MOH. Also, I know from personal experience that many readers, when researching a cemetery, especially one on the National Register of Historic Places, want to know immediately about "Notable burials", and sometimes that's the only research they're doing. It would help the reader to see that heading in the "Contents", even if it is a short paragraph. And finally, I believe it's in keeping with precedent on Wikipedia. I refer you to:
   1. Mill Springs National Cemetery (x1)
   2. Fayetteville National Cemetery (x3)
   3. Tahoma National Cemetery (x3)
   4. Biloxi National Cemetery (x1)

Thank you for your considered reply. Boneyard90 ( talk) 15:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply

The changes look good; I've upped the class to B in all projects. I still disagree about the notable internments section. All the articles you pointed to were of stub/start class, so they haven't really been reviewed. The article about Beth Israel Cemetery in Meridian, Mississippi (the article is actually about the congregation over the cemetery, and I'm probably biased because I'm the one who wrote it haha.. nonetheless...) has been reviewed by other editors and is a GA now. As you can see, there are two or three notable internments in that cemetery (and even images of monuments dedicated to them), but those people are mentioned in the prose. The higher review processes – i.e. GA and FA – focus on removing lists wherever possible and replacing them with prose, and I believe if this article were to be taken through those processes, the reviewer would agree with me that the section should be merged. For now, though, the section is fine and not really required to be merged in order to be B-Class, so I'm not that worried about it. I would suggest either finding more notable internments or merging the section, though, before taking this article any higher. Glad I could help.-- Dudemanfellabra ( talk) 21:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply