Talk:Mark Kellogg (reporter)

Mark Kellogg (reporter) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 15, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
November 12, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 15, 2007.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Mark Kellogg (pictured) became the first Associated Press correspondent to die in the line of duty when he was killed at the Battle of the Little Bighorn?

Current status: Good article

Military history: Biography / North America / United States / American Civil War

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as High-importance).

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Infobox and persondata[edit]

One thing - the article needs infobox and persondata - See Biography infoboxes and WP:PERSONDATA. RHB ^{Talk - Edits} 23:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If someone wants to work up that box, I'm ok with it. However, I personally hate those infoboxes and have no desire to create one myself. Best,--Alabamaboy 14:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Passed as Good Article[edit]

Nothing much to say... well-writed, adequetely sources, and seems to fully cover the subject without going into unnecessary detail. A fine article. --JerryOrr 01:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA sweeps[edit]

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
The refs are a bit of a mess. Barnard's book has no page numbers. There is no need to repeat Hatch, pp. 203-4 in full four times. Since there is a list of sources, short refs might have been used just as easily. The naked URLs should be substituted with titles instead.

These issues have been corrected.--SouthernNights (talk) 02:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
There are a couple of parts that could still need refs, they've been marked off.

These issues have been corrected.--SouthernNights (talk) 02:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It's short, but the subject is relatively peripheral, so that's fine.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Lampman (talk) 20:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted reference saying that Kellogg was one of the first men killed in the battle. The first deaths came during Reno's charge. Kellogg's death took place towards the end of the battle. In addition to being well-documented such an assertion is in opposition to this article's own information placing Kellogg's body near the deep ravine with E company, which definitely took place after Reno's charge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:E48B:B600:70BB:C242:2E5D:AF9A (talk) 05:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All the issues raised in this sweep have been addressed.--SouthernNights (talk) 02:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Good job! Lampman (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Kellogg (reporter). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:12, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]