Main page | Discussion |
News & open tasks | Academy | Assessment |
A-Class review | Contest | Awards | Members |
To request the first A-Class review of an article:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Name of nominated article/archive1
to make way for the new nomination page.A-Class=current
to the {{
WPMILHIST}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page (e.g. immediately after the class=
or list=
field).{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Name of nominated article}}
at the top of the list of A-Class review requests below.The Milhist A-Class standard is deliberately set high, very close to featured article quality. Reviewers should therefore satisfy themselves that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria before supporting a nomination. If needed, a FAQ page is available. As with featured articles, any objections must be "actionable"; that is, capable of rectification.
If you are intending to review an article but not yet ready to post your comments, it is suggested that you add a placeholder comment. This lets other editors know that a review is in progress. This could be done by creating a comment or header such as "Reviewing by Username" followed by your signature. This would be added below the last text on the review page. When you are ready to add comments to the review, strike out the placeholder comment and add your review. For instance, strike out "reviewing" and replace it with "comments" eg:
Comments
Reviewingby Username
Add your comments after the heading you have created. Once comments have been addressed by the nominator you may choose to support or oppose the nomination's promotion to A-class by changing the heading:
Support / Oppose
Comments reviewingby Username
If you wish to abstain from either decision, you may indicate that your comments have been addressed or not addressed. For instance:
Comments
Reviewingby Username addressed / not addressed
This makes it easy for the nominator and closer to identify the status of your review. You may also wish to add a closing statement at the end of your comments. When a nominator addresses a comment, this can be marked as {{ done}} or {{ resolved}}, or in some other way. This makes it easy to keep track of progress, although it is not mandatory.
A nominator may request the review be closed at any time if they wish to withdraw it. This can be done by listing the review at ACRs for closure, or by pinging an uninvolved co-ord. For a review to be closed successfully, however, please ensure that it has been open a minimum of five days, that all reviewers have finalised their reviews and that the review has a minimum of at least three supports, a source review and an image review. The source review should focus on whether the sources used in the article are reliable and of high quality, and in the case of a first-time nominator, spot-checking should also be conducted to confirm that the citations support the content. Once you believe you have addressed any review comments, you may need to contact some of the reviewers to confirm if you have satisfied their concerns.
You may wish to consider taking your article to featured article candidates for review. Before doing so, make sure you have addressed any suggestions that might have been made during the A-class review, that were not considered mandatory for promotion to A-class. It can pay to ask the A-class reviewers to help prepare your article, or you may consider sending it to peer review or to the Guild of Copy Editors for a final copy edit.
If an editor feels that any current A-class article no longer meet the standards and may thus need to be considered for demotion (i.e. it needs a re-appraisal) please leave a message for the project coordinators, who will be happy to help.
A-Class review/reappraisal closure instructions for coordinators | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
A-Class review | A-Class reappraisal | |||
Closure takes place after minimum of five days | Pass • at least 3 comprehensive supports and • no outstanding criteria-based objections |
Fail • less than 3 comprehensive supports or • outstanding criteria-based objections or • no consensus |
Keep • clear consensus to keep or • no consensus |
Demote • clear consensus to demote |
{{ WPMILHIST}} on article talk page | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=pass | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=fail | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=kept | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=demoted • Reassess article and record new class |
The MilHistBot will take care of the details. For detailed advice and manual procedure instructions see the full Academy course. |
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Lockheed YF-22 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I have added considerable amount of design history information compiled from several sources to give a summary of how the design came to be. I believe this article can be considered for A-class. Steve7c8 ( talk) 14:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
All images have appropriate licences. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Steve7c8, saving a spot, will add comments soon. Also, if you could wikimail me the two sources required for the YF-23 article, that would be great. Matarisvan ( talk) 17:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
While nuclear weapons were obviously not used in the 1982 Falklands War, there's an interesting nuclear aspect to the conflict. The Royal Navy warships that were sent to the South Atlantic carried most of the British stockpile of nuclear depth bombs, mainly as it would have taken too long to have offloaded them. The British government and military did not seriously consider using nuclear weapons and the War Cabinet never wanted the depth bombs sent south. It was reported during and after the war that a British ballistic missile submarine had been sent to menace Argentina but historians have found no evidence that such a deployment took place. Interestingly, it emerged in recent years that British Prime Minister Thatcher might have been willing to use nuclear weapons if the war had gone disastrously for her.
I developed this article to set the record straight after a really bad article on this topic was developed and rightly deleted. It's turned out to be a much more complex and interesting topic than I expected. The article was assessed as a GA in mid-June and has since been considerably expanded and improved so I'm hopeful that the A-class criteria are met. Thank you in advance for your comments. Nick-D ( talk) 09:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Great work on this article. A fine piece of scholarship.
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
All images are appropriately licensed Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Nick-D, my comments:
A good read overall, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 20:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
As a note, I'm going to be out of town for the next week. I'll follow up on any comments left during this time when I return. Nick-D ( talk) 11:31, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Tim Hughes (soldier) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) 6,548 This article is about a decorated Australian Aboriginal soldier of the Second World War who went on to achieve success in the soldier-settlement scheme after the war and was appointed MBE for his inaugural chairmanship of the Aboriginal Lands Trust. Not a lot of corporals with their own articles, but Hughes has his own entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography. Have at it. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Great article. Very little to say. Very impressive.
All images are appropriately licensed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67, my comments:
A good read overall Matarisvan ( talk) 16:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
I'd like to offer the following comments on this fine article:
« Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Ernest J. King ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
It's the 80th anniversary of D-Day, so I thought I would nominate a World War II article. After writing up William D. Leahy, I thought I would tackle the US Navy's second most senior admiral, Ernest J. King, a renowned submariner and aviator who commanded the US Fleet during World War II. Hawkeye7 (discuss)
Hi Hawkeye7, saving a spot, will post comments soon.
If you believe an alternative style would be more appropriate for a particular article, seek consensus by discussing this at the article's talk pageHawkeye7 (discuss) 20:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
if an older work only lists an ISBN-10, use that in citations instead of calculating an ISBN-13 for it
That's all from me, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 04:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Miyoshi Nagayoshi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
One of the most underrated Japanese politician and warlord during Sengoku period. There are many modern historians reassessments about him now to points out his importance for his role during the end of Muromachi period Ahendra ( talk) 17:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Ahendra, my comments. Please excuse my lack of usage of diacritics:
I will add more comments soon, this is a large article so it will take time to read through, I hope that is alright. Cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 09:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
« Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Boot Monument ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
If you travel to Saratoga National Historic Park, you will probably come across this somewhat bizarre monument of a boot. Its honoree's name is never mentioned on it, and it would take some research to figure out that it's actually honoring Benedict Arnold. I am nominating this for A-class because I'd like to take this to FA and so I would need to see what further improvements need to be made to it to get it there. Thank you! Rela tivity ⚡️ 00:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
This is all way outside my area of expertise. I presume that Benedict Arnold was rehabilitated long ago. Article looks more like a GA than an FA. Some comments:
Hi Relativity, some comments:
That's all from me, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 05:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Saving a place. Could you ping me once the review above has ended. Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 16:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Relativity, my comments. #17, #24, #26, #40, #41: all ok. Seems like the source review is a pass, now you need just one more support for promotion to A class. Also, I would really appreciate it if you could post your comments at a PR I just opened up, linked here. Cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 12:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
« Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Henry Biard ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
Henry Biard was an early British pilot - aviator's certificate number 218 - and flew in both world wars, but became a national hero for his victory in the 1924 Schneider Trophy seaplane race. He was a close colleague and friend of R. J. Mitchell at Supermarine, where he served as chief test pilot between 1919 and 1928. A colourful character of the old school -- fond of a tall tale (not least his own autobiography, which imposes some interesting challenges of sourcing), not shy of speaking his mind, and every ounce the dashing airborne daredevil. Perhaps ironically given present company, Biard never seemed to take much to military life: he fairly literally crashed out of the Royal Flying Corps just before the First World War, had a fairly uneventful time with the Royal Naval Air Service, and seems to have spent the Second World War doing communications flights. Having recently passed GA, this article may be bound for FAC at some point, and I'd be grateful for some MilHist expertise on the military and technical side of it: almost none of this subject-matter falls into my usual areas of expertise. UndercoverClassicist T· C 20:31, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll try to review this over the weekend. Hog Farm Talk 17:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
My biggest concern here is not related to article quality so much but more placement of this in A-Class review. See note #3 at WP:MILHIST - Military service does not in and of itself place an individual within the scope of the project—particularly in the case of service in modern militaries. To qualify them, an individual's military service must have been somehow noteworthy or have contributed—directly or indirectly—to their notability. and Biard's military service seems rather incidental to his primary notability as an aircraft tester for private industry. Hog Farm Talk 21:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi UndercoverClassicist, some comments:
That's all from me, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 17:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Sihanouk Trail ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this article, originally promoted in 2006, for A-class reassessment. As User:buidhe pointed out on the talk page two years ago, there are outstanding verification issues. Nine citation needed tags. Schierbecker ( talk) 22:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Fort Corcoran ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for reassessment. This article has longstanding issues with unverifiable information that was present in the article at the time it passed ACR in 2007. Eight citation needed tags. Schierbecker ( talk) 18:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Main page | Discussion |
News & open tasks | Academy | Assessment |
A-Class review | Contest | Awards | Members |
To request the first A-Class review of an article:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Name of nominated article/archive1
to make way for the new nomination page.A-Class=current
to the {{
WPMILHIST}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page (e.g. immediately after the class=
or list=
field).{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Name of nominated article}}
at the top of the list of A-Class review requests below.The Milhist A-Class standard is deliberately set high, very close to featured article quality. Reviewers should therefore satisfy themselves that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria before supporting a nomination. If needed, a FAQ page is available. As with featured articles, any objections must be "actionable"; that is, capable of rectification.
If you are intending to review an article but not yet ready to post your comments, it is suggested that you add a placeholder comment. This lets other editors know that a review is in progress. This could be done by creating a comment or header such as "Reviewing by Username" followed by your signature. This would be added below the last text on the review page. When you are ready to add comments to the review, strike out the placeholder comment and add your review. For instance, strike out "reviewing" and replace it with "comments" eg:
Comments
Reviewingby Username
Add your comments after the heading you have created. Once comments have been addressed by the nominator you may choose to support or oppose the nomination's promotion to A-class by changing the heading:
Support / Oppose
Comments reviewingby Username
If you wish to abstain from either decision, you may indicate that your comments have been addressed or not addressed. For instance:
Comments
Reviewingby Username addressed / not addressed
This makes it easy for the nominator and closer to identify the status of your review. You may also wish to add a closing statement at the end of your comments. When a nominator addresses a comment, this can be marked as {{ done}} or {{ resolved}}, or in some other way. This makes it easy to keep track of progress, although it is not mandatory.
A nominator may request the review be closed at any time if they wish to withdraw it. This can be done by listing the review at ACRs for closure, or by pinging an uninvolved co-ord. For a review to be closed successfully, however, please ensure that it has been open a minimum of five days, that all reviewers have finalised their reviews and that the review has a minimum of at least three supports, a source review and an image review. The source review should focus on whether the sources used in the article are reliable and of high quality, and in the case of a first-time nominator, spot-checking should also be conducted to confirm that the citations support the content. Once you believe you have addressed any review comments, you may need to contact some of the reviewers to confirm if you have satisfied their concerns.
You may wish to consider taking your article to featured article candidates for review. Before doing so, make sure you have addressed any suggestions that might have been made during the A-class review, that were not considered mandatory for promotion to A-class. It can pay to ask the A-class reviewers to help prepare your article, or you may consider sending it to peer review or to the Guild of Copy Editors for a final copy edit.
If an editor feels that any current A-class article no longer meet the standards and may thus need to be considered for demotion (i.e. it needs a re-appraisal) please leave a message for the project coordinators, who will be happy to help.
A-Class review/reappraisal closure instructions for coordinators | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
A-Class review | A-Class reappraisal | |||
Closure takes place after minimum of five days | Pass • at least 3 comprehensive supports and • no outstanding criteria-based objections |
Fail • less than 3 comprehensive supports or • outstanding criteria-based objections or • no consensus |
Keep • clear consensus to keep or • no consensus |
Demote • clear consensus to demote |
{{ WPMILHIST}} on article talk page | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=pass | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=fail | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=kept | • Change A-Class=current to A-Class=demoted • Reassess article and record new class |
The MilHistBot will take care of the details. For detailed advice and manual procedure instructions see the full Academy course. |
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Lockheed YF-22 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I have added considerable amount of design history information compiled from several sources to give a summary of how the design came to be. I believe this article can be considered for A-class. Steve7c8 ( talk) 14:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
All images have appropriate licences. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Steve7c8, saving a spot, will add comments soon. Also, if you could wikimail me the two sources required for the YF-23 article, that would be great. Matarisvan ( talk) 17:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
While nuclear weapons were obviously not used in the 1982 Falklands War, there's an interesting nuclear aspect to the conflict. The Royal Navy warships that were sent to the South Atlantic carried most of the British stockpile of nuclear depth bombs, mainly as it would have taken too long to have offloaded them. The British government and military did not seriously consider using nuclear weapons and the War Cabinet never wanted the depth bombs sent south. It was reported during and after the war that a British ballistic missile submarine had been sent to menace Argentina but historians have found no evidence that such a deployment took place. Interestingly, it emerged in recent years that British Prime Minister Thatcher might have been willing to use nuclear weapons if the war had gone disastrously for her.
I developed this article to set the record straight after a really bad article on this topic was developed and rightly deleted. It's turned out to be a much more complex and interesting topic than I expected. The article was assessed as a GA in mid-June and has since been considerably expanded and improved so I'm hopeful that the A-class criteria are met. Thank you in advance for your comments. Nick-D ( talk) 09:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Great work on this article. A fine piece of scholarship.
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
All images are appropriately licensed Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Nick-D, my comments:
A good read overall, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 20:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
As a note, I'm going to be out of town for the next week. I'll follow up on any comments left during this time when I return. Nick-D ( talk) 11:31, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Tim Hughes (soldier) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) 6,548 This article is about a decorated Australian Aboriginal soldier of the Second World War who went on to achieve success in the soldier-settlement scheme after the war and was appointed MBE for his inaugural chairmanship of the Aboriginal Lands Trust. Not a lot of corporals with their own articles, but Hughes has his own entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography. Have at it. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Great article. Very little to say. Very impressive.
All images are appropriately licensed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Peacemaker67, my comments:
A good read overall Matarisvan ( talk) 16:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
I'd like to offer the following comments on this fine article:
« Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Ernest J. King ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
It's the 80th anniversary of D-Day, so I thought I would nominate a World War II article. After writing up William D. Leahy, I thought I would tackle the US Navy's second most senior admiral, Ernest J. King, a renowned submariner and aviator who commanded the US Fleet during World War II. Hawkeye7 (discuss)
Hi Hawkeye7, saving a spot, will post comments soon.
If you believe an alternative style would be more appropriate for a particular article, seek consensus by discussing this at the article's talk pageHawkeye7 (discuss) 20:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
if an older work only lists an ISBN-10, use that in citations instead of calculating an ISBN-13 for it
That's all from me, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 04:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Miyoshi Nagayoshi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
One of the most underrated Japanese politician and warlord during Sengoku period. There are many modern historians reassessments about him now to points out his importance for his role during the end of Muromachi period Ahendra ( talk) 17:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Ahendra, my comments. Please excuse my lack of usage of diacritics:
I will add more comments soon, this is a large article so it will take time to read through, I hope that is alright. Cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 09:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
« Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Boot Monument ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
If you travel to Saratoga National Historic Park, you will probably come across this somewhat bizarre monument of a boot. Its honoree's name is never mentioned on it, and it would take some research to figure out that it's actually honoring Benedict Arnold. I am nominating this for A-class because I'd like to take this to FA and so I would need to see what further improvements need to be made to it to get it there. Thank you! Rela tivity ⚡️ 00:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
This is all way outside my area of expertise. I presume that Benedict Arnold was rehabilitated long ago. Article looks more like a GA than an FA. Some comments:
Hi Relativity, some comments:
That's all from me, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 05:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Saving a place. Could you ping me once the review above has ended. Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 16:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Relativity, my comments. #17, #24, #26, #40, #41: all ok. Seems like the source review is a pass, now you need just one more support for promotion to A class. Also, I would really appreciate it if you could post your comments at a PR I just opened up, linked here. Cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 12:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
« Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Henry Biard ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
Henry Biard was an early British pilot - aviator's certificate number 218 - and flew in both world wars, but became a national hero for his victory in the 1924 Schneider Trophy seaplane race. He was a close colleague and friend of R. J. Mitchell at Supermarine, where he served as chief test pilot between 1919 and 1928. A colourful character of the old school -- fond of a tall tale (not least his own autobiography, which imposes some interesting challenges of sourcing), not shy of speaking his mind, and every ounce the dashing airborne daredevil. Perhaps ironically given present company, Biard never seemed to take much to military life: he fairly literally crashed out of the Royal Flying Corps just before the First World War, had a fairly uneventful time with the Royal Naval Air Service, and seems to have spent the Second World War doing communications flights. Having recently passed GA, this article may be bound for FAC at some point, and I'd be grateful for some MilHist expertise on the military and technical side of it: almost none of this subject-matter falls into my usual areas of expertise. UndercoverClassicist T· C 20:31, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll try to review this over the weekend. Hog Farm Talk 17:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
My biggest concern here is not related to article quality so much but more placement of this in A-Class review. See note #3 at WP:MILHIST - Military service does not in and of itself place an individual within the scope of the project—particularly in the case of service in modern militaries. To qualify them, an individual's military service must have been somehow noteworthy or have contributed—directly or indirectly—to their notability. and Biard's military service seems rather incidental to his primary notability as an aircraft tester for private industry. Hog Farm Talk 21:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi UndercoverClassicist, some comments:
That's all from me, cheers Matarisvan ( talk) 17:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Sihanouk Trail ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this article, originally promoted in 2006, for A-class reassessment. As User:buidhe pointed out on the talk page two years ago, there are outstanding verification issues. Nine citation needed tags. Schierbecker ( talk) 22:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Fort Corcoran ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for reassessment. This article has longstanding issues with unverifiable information that was present in the article at the time it passed ACR in 2007. Eight citation needed tags. Schierbecker ( talk) 18:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)