Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/R. V. C. Bodley

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history | Assessment
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 22:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

R. V. C. Bodley

edit
Nominator(s): Freikorp (talk)

R. V. C. Bodley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because after successfully nominating it for GA and DYK, and and taking it through a peer review, i'd like it to reviewed by people familiar with military articles as i'm not sure if it is quite up to featured status (I would like to nominate it for FAC eventually). This is my first article nominated for A-class at any project. Freikorp (talk) 13:08, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport

I've got no idea how to fix that, other than changing it to an offline source. Help please :). Freikorp (talk) 19:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't think putting the same citation over and over again is necessary.
I assume you are referring to the use of the Snell PDF (incidentally the same reference referred to above) which was, at a couple locations, used multiple times in a row. Originally the citations weren't directly after one another, it just ended up that way after things were moved around. I've removed all unnecessary uses of it now. Freikorp (talk) 19:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The only image of Bodley that i'm seeing there is the one that is already used in the article. Have I missed something? Freikorp (talk) 19:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Supporting.--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 22:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

  • "at locations including Bowdoin College and the Colony Club.": Mentioning these two places and not others suggests that these appearances were memorable or important. Not saying how they were important raises a question.
I only added them because specific locations for his lectures were not easy to find and and these particular locations were notable enough to have their own wiki article. They weren't of any particular importance. Removed. Freikorp (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've changed "Bodley" to "he" or "him" in many places throughout; there's a point that I believe you're not getting here, that restating "Bodley" when it's not necessary for comprehension creates a kind of mini-paragraph-break. Those kinds of breaks can be useful for comprehension, but they're tedious if you overuse them.
Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bodley was a descendant of Sir Thomas Bodley, and also Gertrude Bell's cousin.": If he wasn't a descendant of Bell's cousin, then less ambiguous would be: "Bodley was Gertrude Bell's cousin and a descendant of Sir Thomas Bodley."
Done. Freikorp (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 15:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: looks good to me. I only have a couple of minor suggestions:
    • "Like every other westerner allowed to visit the region, he reported that there..." This seems a bold statement. Can we be certain that every westerner did this? I'd suggest maybe just saying "He reported that..." Or perhaps "Like other western writers allowed to visit the region..."
  • It does seem bold, but extremely few westerners were allowed into the region, and from my limited research none of them appeared to say anything to the contrary, so it may very well be true. Nevertheless, I think removing the word every is probably the right thing to do. Freikorp (talk) 23:48, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • per WP:DATERANGE, the years of service in the infobox should probably be presented as: "1911–19" and "1939–43"
    • "Peattie 1992, p. 333–334" probably should be Peattie 1992, pp. 333–334"
    • title case: "The Hiyoshi review of English studies" --> "The Hiyoshi Review of English Studies"
    • title case: "Fiction 1876–1983: A bibliography of United States editions – Authors" --> "Fiction 1876–1983: A Bibliography of United States Editions – Authors"
    • there is a harvnb error in the bibliography in relation to the Ahmed and Othman source, as it doesn't seem to have a specific citation pointing to it. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:27, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments -- been meaning to look this one over for a while:

  • I've only copyedited the lead a bit, and spotchecked prose elsewhere, but the writing looks in pretty good shape.
  • I also spotchecked the Dale Carnegie reference and tweaked a bit for clarification.
  • Structure makes sense, as does the level of detail.
  • Sources look acceptable to me.
  • As far as the image goes, I'd be interested in Nikki's opinion as to where it needs US PD tag, which is suggested on the file page.

Because I haven't read word-for-word, I won't support outright but other than the possible minor point re. the image, no objections to seeing it promoted -- good effort. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:28, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The image does need a US PD tag as well, though it should be a fairly straightforward pre-1923 designation from the looks of things. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tag added. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 05:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/R._V._C._Bodley&oldid=656339206"