Talk:Battle of Schliengen/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Reviewer: MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

review

  • The placement of some of the pictures leaves large patches of white spaces on my browser. This doesn't look nice. Can you improve?
    • I have no idea how to do this. Auntieruth55 (talk)
      • moved images. See if that's better. Auntieruth55 (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • actually no it didn't improve. I tried something using the {{FixBunching}} template. Now it looks good to me please check.
          • I don't see any difference, so I guess it worked. :)
  • "The mountains in the vicinity [of Mullhaus] are bold" I assume you mean Mulhouse?
    • Müllheim. Done
      • The respective quote still mentions Mullhaus. So is it Mulhouse or Müllheim?
        • It is Müllheim,
  • "Sutzenkirchen"??? I couldn't find that place anywhere. There is a place called Sitzenkirch near Kandern which could be the place you refer to.
    • Yes. fixed. Done
      • I'm confused. You linked Sitzenkirchen while I still think Sitzenkirch is a better choice. done
  • "Feldberg", I linked Feldberg but it is ambiguous but I think it should be Feldberg, Baden-Württemberg, correct?
    • No, there is no article on the place. It's a fleck. I've added coordinates. Done
  • You state losses of 1,200 and 800 men respectively in the info-box. I can't find a citation for this information. The only reference to casualties is in the Aftermath section.
    • I'll add a cite. Done
  • Fix dashing on "The History of the campaign of 1796 in Germany and Italy, p. 122-23." and "The History of the campaign of 1796 in Germany and Italy, pp. 123–24." Notice the two types?
    • Yes, will fix. Thanks. Done Auntieruth55 (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was crossable only at certain places: Kehl, by Strasbourg, and Hüningen, by Basel, where systems of bridges and raised roads made access reliable." not cited
  • "(altitude 755 feet (230 m))" looks a bid odd with two closing brackets. Do you think it would look better with —(dash)ing? reworded to fix. Cite added Auntieruth55 (talk) 13:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pass Looks good to me now. Well done MisterBee1966 (talk) 11:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Schliengen/GA1&oldid=351952426"