Talk:Leopold Karpeles/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 02:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

• External link OK, no DABs
• Images appropriately licensed. No photo of the man himself?
  • Nothing reliable I can find. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• in Washington D.C. first in business and comma after D.C.
  • Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• and was known in social and political circles until his death What does this even mean?
  • Essentially, he palled around DC and as the history books indicate, made friends with a lot of politicians and socialites. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
    • I don't think that this is important enough to have in the lede. The bit in the main body suffices, IMO.
      • Removed from lead. —Ed!^(talk) 00:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
• Underground Railroad, though this was less risky as was Texas Less risky "than" Texas?
  • Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• a volunteer role where he would not be armed and would carry the unit's battle standard, an assignment considered both dangerous and prestigious Move this after standard bearer and rewrite appropriately.
  • Fixed, —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• served with distinction through engagements through the Battle of Kinston compact this and get rid of all the "through"s
  • Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
    • I reworked the beginning of this sentence for you, but it still reads oddly to me. served with distinction in several engagements through the Battle of Kinston, Battle of White Hall and then the Battle of Goldsboro Bridge through December 1862 Were there engagements before Kinston, or are you specifying all of the engagements through the end of the year? Maybe use an "including" rather than "through"--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• A letter of Karpeles written by regimental commander W. S. Shurtless "about" rather than "of"?
  • Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• brigade of drunken Brigadier General James H. Ledlie. Amid an ill-conceived attack ordered by a drunk Ledlie Too many drunk/drunken in close proximity
  • Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
    • I'd drop the first use of drunken. The intoxicated phrasing in the next sentence is fine.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• in veterans organization Grand Army of the Republic "the" veterans and "the" Grand--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ed!:--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Ah thank you for the ping! Will get to this in a bit here. —Ed!^(talk) 02:13, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

• Link company--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• But the progress after the first few days was slow, and after several days the regiment continued its march along with Lee's army. I don't understand what's happening here.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Sturmvogel 66: Thanks for the patience. Addressed all of the above. —Ed!^(talk) 03:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I really don't like the regimental name format that you've adopted here. I'm too familiar with 20th Maine, 1st Minnesota, or 10th Texas and would prefer X State Volunteer Type Regiment. Is this what was decided upon in the lengthy discussion about this a few years ago?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ed!: Where are we on this?

OK, I have rewritten regiment references to this style. —Ed!^(talk) 00:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Great, but there are still a few comments dated 20 June that need to be responded to.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ed!: What's going on here, anything?

Ahh, have made those last two fixes. —Ed!^(talk) 03:02, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

There were a couple of others that you missed, but I did them for you. Feel free to change them back if you prefer.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:19, 25 July 2019 (UTC)