![]() | This Military history WikiProject page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest. | ![]() |
I believe that this is ready for an A-Class marking. I have changed it since my last comment at 13 December 2007. I have added a reference, and have completed it I believe. Dreamafter Talk 19:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC) reply
I have nominated this article, because I believe that it is as good as it can get, and I know that all of you may scream "longer!", but I have looked for more information than is contained, and I could not find any. I also believe that this article is of great quality. < DREAMAFTER> < TALK> 02:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Another important battle of Moldavian Prince Stephen the Great. I would say it easily meets all criteria for A-class. -- Eurocopter tigre 17:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
A good article on the one of the largest US military transport plane. It would be nice for WPMILHIST to have some more A/FA class aircraft articles. -- Eurocopter tigre ( talk) 19:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC) reply
This article is an A-class on WP:Biography. As Tătărescu was mostly a political figure, I think it's notable for the MilHist project because he served as a Minister of War in 1934. He also had a very important activity during WWII, especially fighting with the Iron Guard. -- Eurocopter tigre 12:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Yes, you are correct, but as a prime minister during the war, I think you are still very involved in it. Just think at Churchill, etc. Sincerelly, I don't really know what to say, so I'll let you decide if this article is notable for WPMILHIST or not. -- Eurocopter tigre 16:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC) reply
An excellent article made on a quite sensitive and controversial topic. There were some discussions in the past regarding its neutrality, but the problems are finnaly solved and this article can become an A-class in my opinion. -- Eurocopter tigre 18:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC) reply
This article previously failed an A-class review (see here) owing to lack of broadness in subject and some need of copyediting. This should all have been dealt with now, at least that's what I would say! -- Chris B • talk 16:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Have made major modifications to this B-Class article. Hope it meets the criteria. RM Gillespie 15:54, 9 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Cla68 20:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC) reply
I nominate this article for traing and hope to have gathered enough knowledgeable reviewers this time. Wandalstouring 10:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC) reply
It developed quite well from an unreadable rubbish. Although this was not my merit, I want to push it further to A class. Wandalstouring 11:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment
Apart from that, the wikilinks are relevant, the prose is good and the text is comprehensive. Well done so far. Woodym555 13:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Oppose - In my opinion this article is quite much unreferenced. There are entire subsections such as "Warfare in the Renaissance and Early Modern Period" and "Reconnaissance and patrol" which are completely unreferenced. Also, in "Equestrian competition" subsection, three of the four main paragraphs are lacking citations. I think it won't meet even the GA requirements. -- Eurocopter tigre 12:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC) reply
Currently a well-cited GA, aiming for Featured Article status in the near future, yet I feel it would benefit with an A-class review first. Cheers, Chris.B 15:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC) reply
I believe it is well sourced, well-written, with no edit warring. It is an article describing one of the most decisive events in history and its content is broad enough, in my opinion, to begin upgrading its status. I believe that it has the potential, perhaps with a few more edits, of becoming an FA. Tourskin 19:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC) reply
After these defeats, Andronicus was in no position to send many troops. In 1320, Andronicus II's grandson, Andronicus III was disinherited following the death of Andronicus II's son.[22] In 1321, Andronicus III retaliated by marching on Constantinople; he was given Thrace as an appanage. However, Andronicus III continued to press for his inheritance and in 1322 was made co-emperor. This culminated into a small scale Balkan war in which Serbia backed Andronicus II and the Bulgarians backed his grandson, Andronicus III. Eventually Andronicus III emerged triumphant on May 23 1328. As Andronicus III consolidated his hold on Byzantium, the Ottomans succeeded in taking Brusa from the Byzantines in 1326.[23] thus beginning what would turn out to be a series of successful sieges The last sentence isn't a sentence, punctuation needs sorted. The dates need to be formatted using the guidelines at WP:DATE particularly under Autoformatting and linking. This paragraph seems like a list at the moment and it is just an example. I think it needs a thorough copyedit before it becomes an A-Class article. Woodym555 22:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC) reply
I have started working on this article recently, but it needs a good look at, to get it up to scratch. Any input would be appreciated! -- Zak 20:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC) reply
Oppose I have written a lead for the article now. When i did so i added some example edits in. The summary of the problems is listed below.
I think it needs a thorough copyedit and refinement before becoming and A-Class Article. Woodym555 14:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC) reply
Significant changes had been made since the last A-class review. Mission, Beginnings and Post-communist era sections had been added (these sections were missing at the time of the first review). I would like to see if there is anything else to be done for this article to become an A-class article. Best regards, -- Eurocopter tigre 09:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC) reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article no longer meets A-Class criteria - Hawkeye7 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 18:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Ironclad warship ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
Nominating this for A-class reassessment because of concerns still not addressed from Wikipedia:Featured article review/Ironclad warship/archive1. Way too much uncited text. Schierbecker ( talk) 20:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC) reply
MilHistBot went through and re-assessed this as c-class last week and I am in agreement with the venerable bot. Per Gog, one need go no further than the twenty-eight(!) citation needed tags. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk) 14:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Besides the uncited text, a statement that I flagged as dubious during the 2022 FAR is still present. This needs major work. Hog Farm Talk 14:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Delist -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 19:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Significant changes had been made since the last A-class review. Mission, Beginnings and Post-communist era sections had been added (these sections were missing at the time of the first review). I would like to see if there is anything else to be done for this article to become an A-class article. Best regards, -- Eurocopter tigre 09:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC) reply
The main article for the cannon article series, presently of GA status. It was initially deemed not thoroughly cited enough in its prior nomination here, and although the problems were fixed, the review expired. It should be sufficiently improved now. -- Grimhelm 19:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Previous nomination here.
As this article has been relatively stable for quite some time now, I'd like to bring it forward for another review towards A-Class and, eventually Featured status. The previous review brought forward some concerns regarding balance, quality of sourcing and wording; I found a number of good new resources to flesh things out, replaced some of the questioned sources, reworded, and added some more information where I could. I think the results have turned out fairly well, and would like to hear the views of project members once again. Tony Fox (arf!) 03:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply
I nominate this article for traing and hope to have gathered enough knowledgeable reviewers this time. Wandalstouring 10:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC) reply
A recently written article, am curious as to what changes/improvements might be needed. Balloonman 15:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Renomination. This article was recently added as a Good Article, and I believe that all the concerns raised in the previous A-Class review and the peer review have been resolved by myself or Roger Davies. All comments and concerns welcomed. Carom 18:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC) reply
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 000 yards, use 000 yards, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 000 yards.
[?]You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Medains 11:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I make no comment on the content of the article. I came across it while assessing articles and it had A-class status from other WP projects so I wanted to put it through our process to see if it held up.-- Looper5920 10:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC) reply
This article recently passed as a GA and I would like to see if it can become A-class. If you do oppose the article's nomination could you please write why. Thanks. Kyriakos 05:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I nominated this article for A-Class because of its great in-depth explanation and good refrencing. -- Pupster21 19:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply
No longer meets A-Class criteria at this time Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:17, 30 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Current A-class assessment:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/American Civil War/Archive2.
This article was awarded A-class by a WP:MILHIST review on 28 March 2007 (see above). It went through a few GARs and was kept, but was later delisted as a GA on 28 July 2012 (see Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/American_Civil_War/2). Despite this it looks like it kept its A class rating by default. The article would seem to fail our A class criteria on referencing alone as there are quite a few paragraphs without citations. As such I request this be reassessed / demoted. Anotherclown ( talk) 02:23, 25 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Demote as it stands on, as AC indicates, referencing alone. Formatting-wise, there's also lots of Harv errors to be tidied up. I'd love to see someone rescue the article before next year's sesquicentennial of the end of the war but it doesn't do WP any good to claim it as a MilHist A-Class article in its current state. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Demote on A1, there are sections with no citations at all. Which is a shame given the importance of the topic. Agree that the number of Harv errors is very ugly, and the See also section is not MOS-compliant. I haven't checked the images, but doesn't even look B-Class in its current state. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 12:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Demote: per nom and others, this doesn't meet the A-class criteria at the moment. AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Demote: I did some copyediting, but it really didn't make a dent. - Dank ( push to talk) 13:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Former British Prime Minister. Long, thorough, well-written article. Has earned an A-class from WP:Biography, thought I should nom it to have the assessments match. LordAmeth 16:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC) reply
I've placed this article through peer review, took action based on the comments & suggestions received, and am ready to nominate this for A-class. There aren't yet have any A, GA, or FA class articles which are primarily my work, as far as I'm aware off hand, and as this is a very broad and important (and likely fairly popular) topic, I should like it to be able to stand out as an example of some of my best work. Thank you. LordAmeth 09:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC) reply
Support:
-- Petercorless 22:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment I know you're not a big fan of citations, but there are some really, really bare patches in this one, particularly towards the end. It's quite good otherwise, but I don't think the citations are up to the level of recent A-class promotions. Carom 21:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Finally finished this article. Hope past criticisms have been addressed. RM Gillespie 21:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC) reply
Kirill Lokshin 03:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC) replyThe lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies, if there are any. It should be between one and four paragraphs long, should be carefully sourced as appropriate, and should be written in a clear and accessible style so that the reader is encouraged to read the rest of the article. Small details that appear in the full article should be avoided in favor of a very brief overview of the article.
I nominated this article for A-class because it has historical importance and good content.-- Pupster21 17:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC) reply
I am a bit short on time and these are just initial impressions. I'll add more later. Cheers-- Looper5920 18:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC) reply
Renomination by Wandalstouring. Kirill Lokshin 02:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
For your perusal. RM Gillespie 16:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC) reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article was been extensively reviewed and sourced, is comprehensive, follows guidelines of Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content and this project. Hoping FAC is next. - Trevor MacInnis ( Contribs) 19:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC) reply