Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Helmut Lent

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Promoted -MBK₀₀₄ 23:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Helmut Lent

Nominator(s): MisterBee1966 (talk)

• Featured article candidates/Helmut Lent/archive1

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because I feel it meets the A-Class criteria. MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Two pretty small issues, but make sure your footnotes come after all punctuation, and don't get British and English spelling mixed up. IE armour v. armor. Cheers, ṜedMarkViolinist^{Drop me a line} 14:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I believe that I have addressed the issues. MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support: Congratulations on a very nice article. Overall I believe it to be well written, well illustrated and well referenced. I support this article for A class, but would like to make the following points in review:
  • there were no major WP:MOS issues that I could find, I tweaked any minor ones I could find;
  • there are no dab links, alt text is present and external links all work;
  • the images seem to have appropriate licences, but I'm not an image expert;
  • citation # 78 is just a bare url, could this be formatted to hide the url chain with {{cite web}}?

    done

  • could the information in parentheses in the lead go in a Note, such as that which is already contained in Note 1? I think having the information in the prose takes the readers attention away;

    done

  • the first sentence in the Personal life section needs tweaking, as it is missing something, I believe. "All German officers had to obtain official permission to marry, usually this was a bureaucratic formality". Perhaps re-word to: "All German officers were required to obtain official permission to marry, however, this was usually a bureacratic formality" (emphasis added only to indicate suggested change);

    done

  • in the Summary of career section, where it says "Lent received a posthumous promotion to Colonel Oberst", should this be "Lent received a posthumous promotion to Oberst (Colonel)"?

    done

  • you use two spellings of defence (defense and defence), please make them all consistent. You use the British "honour" and "armour" elsewhere, so if you choose to use defense, I suggest you change honour to "honor" to maintain US spellings, or if you choose to use British English make all instances of defense become "defence" and keep honour the way it is.

    done

Anyway, that is it for my review. Well done and thank you for your contribution. — AustralianRupert (talk) 09:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback MisterBee1966 (talk) 17:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. This is a comprehensive article, and nicely done. I reviewed it in one of its earlier incarnations and also contributed to the copy-editing of it, so please take bear in mind that I had a small part in its creation (that said, the confusion of English and American spelling might have been me. My bad!). I liked the balance between military, private, and public life in this article, and the delicate way it deals with Lent's controversial private life and religious belief. I appreciated also the attention to detail that MrB brought to the article. Auntieruth55 (talk)

• Support. Excellent and well-written, good job. – Joe N 21:46, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.