Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Panipat (1761)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 page.
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]
- Question I think you might want to try a Peer review first. From what you have said, i think you want some editorial input on how best to improve the article. This is best achieved through a Peer Review. A-Class review is a formal assessment procedure against the A-Class criteria. I can put it up for peer review if you want or give you instructions on how to do it. Any questions, do ask on the main project talk page or on my own talk page Woodym555 20:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A few pointers: There do seem to be large areas of text without wikilinks. This is not a good or a bad thing, although i do think any notable thing should be wikilinked to provide context to the article. Use Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) as a reference. Most of the middle sections have no references or inline citations at all. Also, the number of soldiers involved and the associated casualties need referenced. I note that there has been some debate on the talk page with regards to these; a verifiable reference would help clear this up and and would remove the citation needed tag in the lead.Woodym555 21:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A few things to consider: the lead is very short and should be expanded to fully summarize the article (see here for more details), and there is a great deal of uncited information. Also, the long block quotes at the beginning of each section seem to break up the flow of the page (in terms of both appearance and coherence). Carom 21:05, 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.
- The battle section needs to be cleared up completely. It is currently fragmented and not very clear. It is quite hard to follow and there are several small paragraphs that could be merged.
- I think NPOV is still a minor issue. I think the section header Rout and Massacre is indicative of the problem, i think it should be renamed to Aftermath. I removed some weasel words but there may still be some in the article.
- Minor problems with WP:MOS
- I have written a lead, it may need updating though, some information may be incorrect.
- Needs correct citation templates, have done some example ones. See WP:CITE and Wikipedia:Citation templates for more details.
- It needs some "En dashes" as per WP:DASH
- Other general clearup from Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers); times need to be in 24hour clock, i.e 14:00, not 2pm. The dates should be 7 October 1760 or and not the "7th of October 1760" as per WP:DATE.
I think it needs a thorough copyedit and refinement before becoming and A-Class Article. Woodym555 14:05, 11 August 2007 (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 page.