Wikipedia:Peer review/Suiyuan Campaign/archive1

Suiyuan Campaign

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I have been working on bringing this article up from start-class and I would like to get it to GA-class. Any suggestions, advice, or comments regarding the article would be appreciated. Romanov loyalist (talk) 02:25, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from AustralianRupert: G'day, thanks for your efforts with this article. I only have a few very minor suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 00:35, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

is there a relevant page number or range for the Ruigui source?
are there publisher/work and accessdate details for the "Suiyuan 1936: Images of the Anti-Japanese War by Missing Photographer Fang Dazeng" web citation
I would suggest making the "Books" and "Journals" headers third level headers under a second level "References" header, or changing "Books" to "References" and "Journals" to "Further reading" (as it isn't currently cited specifically)
the External links are slightly inconsistent in their format. For instance compare "TIME Oct. 23" with "TIME, Dec. 11" and "TIME Magazine, Feb. 12" etc
there is one dab link that should be sorted: "Chahar"
suggest linking "Kuomintang"
currently the infobox seems a little lop-sided (i.e. the division between the belligerents which is usually in the centre seems to be too far to the left), is there a way to fix this? Possibly if you use break tags?
instead of a largely empty "Order of battle" section, I suggest changing this header to "Opposing forces". You could still keep the main article link, but could provide a few short outline of the strengths and units etc
some of the information in the infobox does not appear to be in the body of the article, eg. 45,000; 16,000; 19th Army etc". This could be included in an Opposing forces section if you chose to go down that path

Thanks for looking it over, and the other articles I posted on the military history assessments page. To address the points: with the Ruigui source I am not sure of the page number, it was used on the original article and they did not have any page number there. I don't have any way to access it and I do not know Chinese in any case. I added more details, including dates, to the photographer source, and changed formatting of the sources. I also changed the link names for the TIME Magazine so they are more organized and consistent. I specified the link to Chahar and linked to Kuomintang.

For the infobox, I am not sure what you mean. It seems to be in the center on my computer. I will also expand to the order of battle section and include some of the infobox information in it.Romanov loyalist (talk) 03:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. I'll do more copyediting if you bring the article to A-class review. - Dank (push to talk) 18:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]