Talk:Army of the Rhine and Moselle/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MisterBee1966 (talk · contribs) 14:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I will start the review shortly MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	please link Desaix on its first use in the main body of the text Brigade Nouvion, do we know Nouvion's full name? de légère and de ligne, you have a note explaining what these terms mean. Would it be possible to reference this note near the first occurance of these terms? Maybe in the "Order of battle" section?
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	I wonder if a note or caption to the location map in section "Campaign in 1796" should say that the map reflects the borders of present-day Germany. "35 kilometers (22 mi)" and "2 miles (3.2 km)", either metric units first and English second (or vice versa) but not mixed
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Is it possible to add either the OCLC number or the ISBN number to the sources used. Example "The Army of the French Revolution: From Citizen-Soldiers to Instrument of Power" has both OCLC and ISBN number see here
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Nice work, congratualtions

I'll update the bib with oclc numbers, although I don't think they are necessary. Nouvion--don't know his name. not available in any of my sources. fixed the other comments so far. auntieruth (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)