Talk:Fort Greble

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Fort Greble has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on July 25, 2007.
July 31, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
This article is supported by the District of Columbia WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to District of Columbia-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] GA review comments

Hello, here are my comments following a review for good article criteria.

  • I'm not sure I like the image in the infobox because it isn't actually of Fort Greble itself. Seems a bit strange to have "something like what you might have found at Fort Greble" being the main picture.
I haven't been able to find any pictures of the fort in operation, so it was the best I could do. Removed.
Understood. You could place the image elsewhere, possibly smaller. It was just misleading in the manner in which was being used originally. The Rambling Man 15:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay. I'll be putting that one back in, as well as some pictures of the types of cannons featured at the fort. Any other suggestions?
  • Why is 1861 wikilinked in the infobox and no other years wikilinked? I'd unlink it.
Unlinked
  • For year and page ranges, use the en-dash, per WP:DASH.
Fixed the range in the infobox. Couldn't find any others
Check all the page ranges in the references, they need en-dashes as well. The Rambling Man 15:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Got 'em. Good eye.
  • For section headings, don't over-capitalise - see WP:HEAD.
Fixed.
  • Place citations in accordance with WP:CITE, so on the right-hand side of punctuation where possible and no space between the citation and the punctuation.
Fixed the reference to the defensive perimeter.
  • Wikilink whole dates per WP:DATE.
Fixed
  • Consider wikilinking Capitol to assist the non-expert readers.
Fixed
  • Gen. is abbreviated while Major isn't. Be consistent (I'd use the full titles).
Fixed
  • Avoid "hadn't" - use "had not"
Fixed
  • If possible, wikilink some of the weapon types described e.g. howitzer, mortar etc.
Fixed to the extent that the articles exist. Many of them, such as Field Howitzer, do not exist as separate articles.
Understood, looks better to me. The Rambling Man 15:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't put external links in the main body (e.g. the link to Fort Greble Recreation Center), they belong in the External links section (per WP:EL)
Done, and wikilinked the name in the main body.

With these in mind, I'll place the GA on hold until they're corrected. The Rambling Man 11:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Good work, I'm promoting to GA now. Well done. The Rambling Man 14:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic addition of "class=GA"

A bot has added class=GA to the WikiProject banners on this page, as it's listed as a good article. If you see a mistake, please revert, and leave a note on the bot's talk page. Thanks, BOT Giggabot (talk) 05:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)