Talk:Little Rock campaign

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Little Rock campaign/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 02:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Will take this up. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 02:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Criteria

GA Criteria
GA Criteria: 1 1.a Y 1.b Y 2 2.a Y 2.b Y 2.c Y 2.d Y 3 3.a Y 3.b Y 4 4.a Y 5 5.a Y 6 6.a Y 6.b Y

• No DAB links Y
• No dead links Y
• No missing citations Y

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

Early maneuvers

• with the goal of installing a pro-Union government at Little Rock was this government meant to compete for legitimacy with the Confederate one, or simply to begin the work of civil administration if that is known?
  • Competing, noted. Hog Farm _Talk 04:03, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
• which returned safely[18] with two men killed and six wounded suggest which returned safely[18], although with two men killed and six wounded
  • Done

Brownsville and Bayou Meto

• while Marmaduke with a rear guard would try to draw the Union troops into an ambush. does this mean he was using the rear guard specifically to draw them in, or simply that he had one while attempting this? Suggest while Marmaduke would try to use a rearguard to draw the Union troops into an ambush for the former, and while Marmaduke would would try to draw the Union troops into an ambush, protected by a rearguard for the latter.
  • It's the former, changed

Crossing the river

• Price had a little less than 8,000 men with which to defend Little Rock; about 6,500 were in the fortifications across the river and the rest were with Walker guarding river crossings south of the city. the lede says The overall Confederate commander, Major General Sterling Price, aligned most of his 8,000-man army in fortifications north of the Arkansas River, while some cavalry defended river crossings south of Little Rock.; it may bear repeating that Walker's forces were mostly cavalry.
  • Done

Aftermath

• Steele placed Davidson in command of the defense of the city, ordered the construction of defensive positions south of the city, had Isaac Murphy appointed as a provisional governor, and sent Powell Clayton to occupy Pine Bluff. you may wish to move here-on of the first paragraph to the second paragraph, to separate assessment from literal following events.
  • Moved paragraph break
• @Hog Farm: That is all of my suggestions. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
  • All but one of these are done, and I'll research that last point after work. Hog Farm _Talk 17:58, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Evrik (talk) 23:16, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that after the Little Rock campaign, Union forces held three-quarters of Arkansas? Source: Christ 2010
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tipping points in the climate system

Improved to Good Article status by Hog Farm (talk). Self-nominated at 18:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Overall, hook is interesting and cited, article was just recently promoted to GA, free of any copyvio issues and long enough. I see no reason not to approve this hook. JJonahJackalope (talk) 03:01, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Confederate orbat

Mdewman6 - should we even have that regimental-level orbat at all? It's a bit unbalanced to only have the CSA one, and it's largely unsourced. None of the secondary sources I consulted for this article provide this information at all. I guess we could try to find this information in the Official Records but I'm not sure how relevant it is to include this level of information when most units especially for the CSA saw little action. It also causes some difficulties with the GA status for this article to have all that largely unsourced. Hog Farm _Talk 23:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@Hog Farm:, I was just trying to cope with the fact we had a stand alone article for just the Confederate orbat, but no Union orbat, which doesn't really make sense with the new WP:ORBAT naming convention. I'm open to whatever makes the most sense, though. Ideally, if the orbat could be sourced, a Union one could be created, and then spunout into Little Rock campaign order of battle. There is also Battle of Bayou Fourche order of battle, which is largely overlapping and perhaps redundant. So not sure what to do. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, we're better off creating a single Little Rock campaign order of battle with both sides' orders. Bayou Fourche is going to be redundant to the main campaign one, so I'd just redirect it to the campaign one once that's up and running. The Bayou Fourche one is probably accurate for both sides for the campaign, but I'd need to do some digging in the ORs to verify that and I'm not sure when I'll have time. Hog Farm _Talk 00:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)