Talk:Battle of Trois-Rivières/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Specific concerns

• Lead feels a bit skimpy. Suggest adding a sentence about the background to the battle, why were the American's in Quebec in the first place?
• When did Sullivan take command?

Neither of these is enough to hold back GA status. I've taken the liberty of doing a light copyedit. The prose is still a bit clunky at places, if your goal is FAC, I strongly suggest a peer review. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the positive review! I know I've got a date on Sullivan's arrival somewhere, I'll put it in (that whole situation was an awful, disorganized, mess, and not all that well documented, but I know that date exists). As for why they were there, I thought the first sentence of the second lead paragraph answered that; I can probably make it more explicit, though. Magic♪piano 14:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)