Talk:373rd (Croatian) Infantry Division/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk · contribs) 22:38, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Progression

• Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
• Version of the article when review was closed: [2]

Technical review

• Citations: The Citation Check tool reveals no errors with reference consolidation (no action req'd).
• Disambiguations: no few dab links [3] (no action req'd)
• Linkrot: external links all check out [4] (no action req'd)
• Alt text: Map lacks alt text so you might consider adding it [5] (suggestion only - not an ACR req).

• Done.

• Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool reveals no issues with copyright violations or close paraphrasing (only a wiki mirror) [6] (no action req'd).
• Duplicate links: no duplicate links (no action req'd).

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

  • The first sentence of the "formation" section (added recently by another editor), doesn't really work on its own. Could it be worked into the paragraph below? Given that the 369th Croatian Infantry Division is already mentioned in the second para some of the new sentence is probably redundant.

• • Done, I think.

• • "...On 5 July, the Croat commander of the reconnaissance battalion, Major Bakarec...", rank should be removed here as he has already been formally introduced per WP:SURNAME

• • Fixed.

• • in places the prose is a little repetitive, in particular you use the construction "the division" a lot (understandably). However, in places you do that twice in the same sentence. Suggest rewording in places using "it" or something like that.

• • Been through and reduced occurrences of "division"

• • "This was followed on 16 August by the replacement of Windisch by Oberstleutnant (Lieutenant Colonel) Mück...", do we know Muck's first name? If so it should be added at first use per WP:SURNAME.

• • No source for first name available.

• • Same with Oberstleutnant Hühnewaldt.

• • No source for first name available.

• • "In late December 1944, Oberstleutnant Hühnewaldt...", should just be "In late December 1944, Hühnewaldt..." removing rank per WP:SURNAME

• • Done.

• • Major Ristow's first name also (if available).

• • No source for first name available.

• • typo here I think "...with the regimental commander was..." (think "was" is out of place).

• • Thanks, yep, definitely. Fixed.

• • This sentence probably needs a few commas: "The division formed a significant part of the ground force used by XV Mountain Corps in Operation Rösselsprung launched on 25 May 1944 with the objectives of killing or capturing the Partisan leader Josip Broz Tito and destroying his headquarters at Drvar."

• • Punctuated.

• • presentation of timings are slightly off, as their should be a space b/n the "am" and the number, i.e. "5 am" not 5am per MOS:TIME.

• • Fixed.

• • prose is a little repetitive here: "...where it surrendered to the Partisans at the village of Raka on 10 May 1945, where the remaining..." (where twice)

• • Fixed.

• • a few endashes req'd in date ranges in the references per WP:DASH.

• • Done.

• • The Obhođaš reference needs an oclc or an isbn if available. Also no req for a page number here.

• • After some consideration (per the article talk page), I've formed the view the source isn't reliable, and have deleted it.

• • Consider adding the "language=German" parameter to the Schraml reference.

• • Done.

• • Consider adding it to the category: "Military units and formations disestablished in 1945"

• • Done.

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

  • All major points cited using WP:RS.
  • No issues with OR.
  • The first sentence of the "formation" section needs a citation.

• • No longer an issue, sentence removed as it was inaccurate and unsourced.

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

  • Most major points seem to be covered without going into undue detail.
  • Level of coverage broadly seems appropriate.
  • I wonder if we need to explain why Croatians came to be fighting for the Germans (perhaps a sentence or two could be added to the background)?

• • Done.

• • Also are the number of casualties suffered by the division known?

• • Unfortunately not, if they were I would have expected Schraml to mention it.

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

  • No issues here.

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

  • No issues here.

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:

  • Image is PD and seem appropriate to the article.

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

Couple of points to deal with / discuss above. Otherwise it looks very good to me. Anotherclown (talk) 09:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

All points addressed, thanks for the review Ac! Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

No worries at all. Passing now. Anotherclown (talk) 11:48, 18 August 2013 (UTC)