Wikipedia:Peer review/2nd West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2nd West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment[edit]

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

I've listed this article for peer review because I have updated the article substantially. My goal is to get it up to Good Article. I have not been able to find any good examples to use a template for this type of Civil War regiment article.

Thanks, TwoScars (talk) 21:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

  • I see we share an alma mater ... I got my masters at UNCG.
MBA UNCG TwoScars (talk) 21:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've copyedited down to Kanawha Valley and skimmed the rest, and I don't think prose issues will be a problem if you choose to take this later to FAC, where I'll be happy to support on prose and copyedit the rest (eventually). - Dank (push to talk) 22:53, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. Would not want to revert any of the copyediting—it is all good. Any concerns about the length of the article? TwoScars (talk) 21:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's sometimes hard to find reviewers at FAC for articles this long. Other than that, no concerns. - Dank (push to talk) 22:07, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I was worried about that source. However, the author of the blog is Scott C. Patchan, who wrote two of the books that I used as sources for events in the Shenandoah Valley. I can replace that source (although I thought the blog was interesting). It might take me a few days to find it in the sources that I have already used.TwoScars (talk) 21:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:SPS, since he's a published author on this topic it's fine to keep it - I just wasn't sure. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Newton et al in the reflist isn't cited in the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Newton was going to be a source in the Organization section, but I made the section smaller. I will remove. I appreciate you looking at the article. Do you think I should make the section on the Wytheville Raid shorter? I am working on a Wytheville Raid/Toland's Raid article—which would make it more feasible to shorten the section.TwoScars (talk) 21:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hard to say without seeing the new article, but either way you'd at least want a summary here. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: G'day, thanks for your efforts with this article, I have a few minor suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 05:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thank you for taking the time to look over the article. I appreciate all of your suggestions—and your patience as I try to figure things out. TwoScars (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the Cited works section, the titles of the works should probably use title case capitalization;
    • I have always preferred the title case capitalization, but I tried to use the exact title as presented in OCLC WorldCat. For example OCLC WorldCat lists the title of the second book as "The War of the Rebellion : a compilation of the official records of the Union and Confederate armies." I would have preferred to use "The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies". Should I change away from WorldCat? TwoScars (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • titles such as "REVIEW OF THE ARMIES" should be decapitalised to use either sentence or title case per MOS:ALLCAPS;
    • decapitalised. Leaving CWSAC, since changing it to Cwsac would be like calling USA Usa. TwoScars (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the lead, the link for "regiment" should be moved to the first paragraph;
  • in the lead, link Company (military unit)
    • linked to US portion of Company (military unit) TwoScars (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the infobox dates such as "1861 - 1862" should have an unspaced endash and be presented as "1861–62" per WP:DATERANGE
  • if you are looking for some similar Civil War articles that have been quality reviewed, a couple spring to mind, which might help you (these are A-class and FA-class):

Comments I'll do a review of the images.--Khanate General ☪ talk project mongol conquests 20:10, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/2nd_West_Virginia_Volunteer_Cavalry_Regiment/archive1&oldid=1138559391"