Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of commanders of the British 3rd Division/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of commanders of the British 3rd Division edit

List of commanders of the British 3rd Division (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another list of British commanders, this time for the 3rd Division. This formation was initially raised in 1809, and has since been raised and disbanded on several occasions. During this time period, it has had 67 permanent commanders (including several temporary and acting commanders, who are also listed), with the most recent being appointed in 2021. This list used the previously promoted (FL) List of commanders of the British 2nd Division as a basis, so hopefully everything meets muster.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review — Pass edit

  • The only image in the article is appropriately licenced, and has ALT text. Pass for image review. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your image reviewEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by ChrisTheDude edit

  • "In addition to directing the tactical battle the division is involved in" - "In addition to directing the tactical battle in which the division is involved"
  • "As of 18 October 2021" - that was nearly two months ago. Maybe just say "As of late 2021" rather than being as specific as a single day? Or just note the date since when he has been in charge?
  • "Craufurd's brigade was used to form the Light Division, which he took command of." => "Craufurd's brigade was used to form the Light Division, of which he took command."
  • "When Picton returned to the peninsular" => "When Picton returned to the peninsula"
  • "On returning to the peninsular" => "On returning to the peninsula"
  • "Kielmansegg took" - different spelling to the name column
  • "Ten days after taking command, Mackenzie was invalided back to the UK on 29 October 1914." - yet it says he was appointed on the 15th?
  • "As the 3rd Canadian Division would be working in close proxmitity" - typo on last word
  • Ah I now understand why the lead says "As of 18 October 2021". My earlier point stands :-)
  • That's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your comments and review. I have worked through to address the various concerns that you raised (as for the ten-day comment, must have been a brain fart on my behalf!)EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by RunningTiger123 edit

Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
* "Picton, the commanding officer of the 3rd Division, for the majority of the Peninsular War" → "Thomas Picton, the commanding officer of the 3rd Division for the majority of the Peninsular War"
  • "The 3rd Division was an infantry division of the British Army, which was first formed in 1809." → "The 3rd Division was an infantry division of the British Army and was first formed in 1809." (current sentence implies British Army wasn't formed until 1809)
  • "20th Century" → "20th century" and "21st Century" → "21st century"
  • Table should probably have sorting capabilities for "No.", "Appointment date", "Rank", and "General officer commanding" (be sure to sort the last one by last name)
  • "Alten resumed command of the division once combat ended" can end with a period
    • Same for "During this period, no one held the title of divisional commander"; "The division was evacuated via Dunkirk to the UK, following the Allied defeat in the Battle of France"; "In February 1964, the division HQ was temporarily deployed to Cyprus"; and "By this point, the division was also known as the 3rd (UK) Mechanised Division"
  • Why is the note "The division was disbanded in Germany, on 1 December 1992" included for Wallace when Pike was the commander at that point?

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your comments and review. I have also tried to address all of your concerns (re the disbanding issue, I think that may have been a copy and paste error? I have updated, after re-reviewing the sources).EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for forgetting about this for so long; more than happy to support this list for promotion. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TRM edit

  • "The 3rd Division was an..." so I immediately thought it was defunct, but apparently not. It might have changed names/roles etc, but in essence it's still active, right?
    Correct. Over-zealous with the copy and the paste. I have changed to "is an"
  • "commanding (GOC). In this role, the GOC receives" can't you just merge, e.g. "commanding (GOC) who receives"?
    Updated per your suggestionEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "over a history that has spanned over " over/over, maybe make the second one "more than"?
    TweakedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was broken-up, once" is that really hyphenated?
  • "was broken-up to provide" ditto.
    Not sure, to be honest. The Cambridge English Dictionary, for example, uses a hyphen when discussing a break-up of an entity.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    A "break-up" is not the same as something being "broken up". The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 20:30, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plus quick repeat, perhaps use "disbanded" the second time?
    Wording switched per your suggestionEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "permanent standing formation" what is one of those? Is it similar/the same as Standing army?
    I have made a couple of tweaks to the existing sentence, but not major changes. Basically, the UK had a standing army, but it was on based on battalions. In a time of crisis, these were formed into brigades and divisions. At the end of a crisis, the division would be disbanded. In 1902, the British Army enacted some reforms to ensure that the army always had divisions at the ready and a handful were formed (that a decade later would form the basis of the BEF). Thoughts on wording changes to try and capture that?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could link Mechanized infantry as it's jargon.
    Link addedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "mid-90s" 1990s.
    TweakedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "part in peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina.[9] " isn't there a specific article about that UN mission available to be linked?
    I have added an extra link at the end of the sentence in parenthesisEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The row scope element should be unique so the name of the officer, rather than the number of the appointment (as "acting" appears a few times...)
    I have updated per your commentEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is also the problem that when sorting by "No.", all the "acting" etc disappear off to the bottom because it's sorting alphanumerically, so you need to force a hidden sort on those to make sure they sort in the correct order.
    I checked out the Help:Sorting page and made a change, does this work (I'm not entirely sure)?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have a mix of unhyphenated and hyphenated "Major(-)General" in the table, why?
    In the late 90s, hyphens were dropped from ranks per the official records (the Gazette). There is a note, when the table is not sorted, on the first entry (Richard Dannatt) that this occurs on to briefly explain.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Items which are linked in a sortable table should be linked every time because after re-sorting, there's no guarantee the linked item will appear first.
  • In a sortable table, you can't assume that text retains its context, so "When Picton returned to the peninsula" is like "which peninsula? Where??" And "of the division once combat ended." which combat? Where?
    I have worked through the table and added in some additional links, including the items mentioned.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A few fundamental issues here, but happy to re-review once they're dealt with. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 20:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review and comments. I have worked on the list to enact the changes you suggested. I have also left some comments above to address outstanding concerns.

Source review passed; TRM never came back to this (and the nominator hasn't edited in 6+ weeks) but I'm satisfied with the list as-is. Promoting. --PresN 16:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: Seems like you missed adding the template. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, thanks! --PresN 21:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_commanders_of_the_British_3rd_Division/archive1&oldid=1087872683"