Wikipedia:Peer review/23rd (Northumbrian) Division/archive1

23rd (Northumbrian) Division

The 23rd (Northumbrian) Division had a short history during the Second World War: an untrained infantry unit untimely deployed overseas to conduct labour duties in support of the British Expeditionary Force, it was thrown onto the frontlines with mixed results as the Battle of France entered the final stages.

The article has recently been overhauled and expanded. I have also requested that the Guild of Copy Editors give the article the once over to help improve the prose. I will be looking to take the article through its GA, A, and FA reviews in the coming months. It would much appreciated for a peer review to help whip the article into shape with that in mind.

Regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:22, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• Currently Hewitson is in the References list but there are no citations to it

• Suggest scaling up the maps

• Suggest moving the "It had been envisioned" piece into the end of the Background section - would seem to fit better there. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: Sorry about the delay, thank you for the suggestions and they have been acted upon.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Comments from AustralianRupert: G'day, nice work. Thanks for your efforts. I have a couple of minor points/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 12:54, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

• "defense" and "defenses" --> should this be "defence"/"defences", given that it is a British topic?
• there are a couple of dab links: Siege of Calais, Watten, St. Omer -- suggest reaiming these links if possible'
• light infantry lineage of the regiment: should "regiment" here be "division"?
• citations 38 & 41 could probably be combined as a WP:NAMEDREF
• is there a corresponding long citation for "WO 167/262"? Also, I suggest using an sfn citation for this, for consistency
• in the References, Hewitson isn't specifically cited -- suggest the entry be moved to the Further reading section, or removed

@AustralianRupert: Thank you for the comments. Your recommendations have been acted upon. I have now added in a long citation for the above War Office record.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries, good luck with taking the article further. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@EnigmaMcmxc: G'day, as this review has been open for several months now, I suggest it be closed. Do you have any objections to this? I can help you with doing this if you need a hand with it. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:06, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Comments from PM Good work so far. I have a few comments:

• in the lead, suggest "its soldiers were separateddispersed"
• suggest "and immaturessoldiers under that age were"
• "which had to be diverted from training to help"
• "46th Infantry dDivisions"
• "did little to solve the crisis"?
• say what Hugh Sebag-Montefiore is. eg "The author Hugh Sebag-Montefiore"
• who were the "Tyneside Scottish"? battalion and regiment?
• drop the hyphenation from "for less than 24-hours" and later "48-hours"
• "northeast of the Arras"
• where did 8 RNF come from? They weren't part of the two brigades listed earlier?
• give John Drewienkiewicz's rank

Hope that helps. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: Thank you for your comments. I have acted upon your recommendations and comments.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries. I look forward to seeing it move through the assessment points. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)