Talk:Paul von Werner

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Paul von Werner/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 09:25, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Auntieruth55. Just checking that you have spotted my comments below. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

• I have copy edited. Let me know of anything you aren't happy with. good
• "which was to resume the fortress of Kołobrzeg but had hardly any supplies". This doesn't make much sense to me. Is "resume" a typo? fixed. Resume the siege
• There is a shortage of pictures. How about one of the equestrian statue of Frederick the Great, even if it doesn't show Werner's name?
• There are missing publisher locations, OCLCs and ISBNs missing in the sources. locations etc added. OCLCs not available for Bucheim, too old. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:33, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
• Kronoskaf does not strike me as a WP:RS. It seems to be an open wiki type project. It claims to be based on König, A .B.: Biographisches Lexikon aller Helden und Militärpersonen welche sich in preussischen Diensten berühmt gemacht haben, Vol. IV. Berlin 1791. It would be preferable to draw information direct from that, which is a RS. actually, it is. It's well researched and carefully written. but I changed the source

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

• Hi Gog the Mild done....auntieruth (talk) 22:58, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

@Auntieruth55: That's a lot of edits since I last looked at it. It reads better now. Another sterling piece of work to add to your oeuvre. I don't know how you do it. Gog the Mild (talk) 08:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed