Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/2011/Demoted

Demoted

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.

---

Close as consensus to delist, Woody (talk) 08:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Lee-Enfield

Nominator(s): Pyrotec (talk)

Current A-class assessment: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Lee-Enfield/archive1.

This article was awarded A-class by a WP:MILHIST review in 25 February 2009 (see above). It was not at that time a GA and it was was recently submitted to WP:GAN in March 2011 and failed (see Talk:Lee-Enfield/GA1). As the reviewer at GAN, I'm requesting a review of its A-class status. Since I don't regard it as fully compliant with WP:WIAGA, I suspect that it is not fully compliant with WP:MILHIST A-class requirements. Pyrotec (talk) 21:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

• Delist: unfortunately, I don't believe that the article meets the current A-class referencing requirement. Indeed, currently it is probably only Start class on the Milhist scale. For instance, IMO, the following information needs citations:
  • in the Rifle No 5 Mk I section, "The No. 5 was first issued to the British 6th Airborne Division and in use during their occupation of Denmark in 1945";
  • in the Lee-Enfield conversions/sniper rifles sub section, the last part of the second paragraph: "This particular sight progressed through three marks...";
  • the entire L59A1 Drill Rifle section is unreferenced;
  • the Elkins Automatic Rifle section;
  • the Howard Frances machine carbine section;
  • the Howell Automatic Rifle section;
  • the Reider Automatic Rifle section;
  • the last sentence in the first paragaph of the Conversion to 7.62 section;
  • the entire second and fourth paragraphs in the Conversion to 7.62 section;
  • the last part of the second paragraph in Ishapore 2A/2A1 section;
  • the entire third paragraph in the Ishapore 2A/2A1 section;
  • the List of manufacturers section;
  • the Armalon section;
  • the last part of the first paragraph in The Lee-Enfield in military/police use today section: "Used as a drill weapon and in ceremonial...";
  • the last sentence in the last paragraph in The Lee-Enfield in military/police use section: "Lee-Enfield rifles have also been seen in the hands of both the Naxalites and the Indian police in the ongoing Maoist insurgency in rural India";
  • there are a number of citation needed tags in the Users section;
  • also, some of the web links are bare urls - these should be formatted, either with {{cite web}} or some other way, and should include publisher and accessdate information
  • finally, are all the web citations to reliable sources? At least one (# 59), appears to be a forum. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

• Delist: Have to agree with above reference are a concern bare url formatting and the web sites need examination. Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:43, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

• Delist: Yep, on uncited passages alone it fails the A-Class criteria (and, for that matter, B-Class). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 16:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. 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.