The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 19:40, 12 February 2011 [1].
Battle of the Bowling Alley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article. It has passed GAN and a MILHIST ACR. — Ed! (talk) 03:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. -- Pres N 21:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments –
Comment I only had a chance to copyedit the first part of this article before our 28-day A-class deadline ran. - Dank ( push to talk) 16:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments
Sourcing check
Background section: no problem I can see
Prelude section:
Battle Section
Aftermath Section
I hope this summery can shine some light on the "creative sourcing" issue.
Jim101 ( talk) 03:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments. Great story. Prose needs tweaking.
Oppose per criteria 1a, 1b and 1c ... or rather, per the impossibility of evaluating 1a, 1b and 1c when the footnotes (still) don't accurately represent where the material came from. For all I know, I'm partly to blame that the nominator prefers copying public domain text, if I wasn't patient enough regarding this nominator's prose in several A-class reviews. I also can't blame the nominator's judgment if "past reviews have seen this sort of over-citing criticized"; the process doesn't work if you can't trust the consensus of reviewers (and I really need to know who said that and have a talk with them). - Dank ( push to talk) 14:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 19:40, 12 February 2011 [1].
Battle of the Bowling Alley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article. It has passed GAN and a MILHIST ACR. — Ed! (talk) 03:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. -- Pres N 21:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments –
Comment I only had a chance to copyedit the first part of this article before our 28-day A-class deadline ran. - Dank ( push to talk) 16:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments
Sourcing check
Background section: no problem I can see
Prelude section:
Battle Section
Aftermath Section
I hope this summery can shine some light on the "creative sourcing" issue.
Jim101 ( talk) 03:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments. Great story. Prose needs tweaking.
Oppose per criteria 1a, 1b and 1c ... or rather, per the impossibility of evaluating 1a, 1b and 1c when the footnotes (still) don't accurately represent where the material came from. For all I know, I'm partly to blame that the nominator prefers copying public domain text, if I wasn't patient enough regarding this nominator's prose in several A-class reviews. I also can't blame the nominator's judgment if "past reviews have seen this sort of over-citing criticized"; the process doesn't work if you can't trust the consensus of reviewers (and I really need to know who said that and have a talk with them). - Dank ( push to talk) 14:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply