Talk:Ojo de Agua Raid
(Redirected from Talk:Raid on Ojo de Agua)
Latest comment: 13 years ago by XavierGreen in topic GA Review
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ojo de Agua Raid article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Ojo de Agua Raid has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 18, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that on October 21, 1915, a band of Mexicans invaded the United States and conducted a raid on Ojo de Agua in Texas as part of the Plan de San Diego? | |||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Orphaned reference
editHi. Good work on this article. I have one observation: Note # 5, "US Army Armor School, p. 239" does not appear to be identified fully in the References section. Would it be possible to add these details, please? Also, I've made a few changes, mainly just copy editing/fixing typos etc. Please review and tweak as you feel necessary. Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- I added the ref to the ref section, i had a feeling i forgot something when i fifrst posted the article now i know what it was lol. The changes you made all are excellent.XavierGreen (talk) 19:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Cheers, keep up the good work. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Raid on Ojo de Agua/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- 1 missing cite.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- I think i've fixed the issues above, thanks for your review!XavierGreen (talk) 22:47, 16 January 2011 (UTC)