Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Easy Company (506 PIR) veterans/archive1

List of Easy Company (506 PIR) veterans edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…The beginning paragraph is relevant to the article. All information stated includes footnotes, books (references), along with external links. And on top of that, there are categories, articles that are linked to this page related to it, and over 10 pictures.

Thanks, Nick Ornstein (talk) 02:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I do not really understand your stated reasons for listing the article here. I assume that you want this to become a WP:FL and see that it has already had an unsuccessful FLC. With another possible WP:FLC in mind, here are some suggestions for improvement.

I would look at the coimments made in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of living Band of Brothers veterans/archive1 and take them very seriously. The living veteraqns part is a self-deleting list, and the recent deaths part seems arbitrary (what is the criteria for inclusion) and almost certainly incomplete. I think the suggestion made in the previous FLC to just make a list of ALL the members of Easy Company is the only way to go here.
As it is, the article on E Company, 506th Infantry Regiment (United States) lists many (if not all) of the members and so this could be seen as an unneeded content fork.
I would look carefully at Wikipedia:Featured list criteria, this has several places that it needs to improve to come close to meeting those criteria too.
- From WP:WIAFL: Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. How does the current lead do this?
- I also worry about 3a (comprehensiveness) and 3b (not a content fork) here
This definitely needs a ref: Easy was (and is still) recognized as the best known company of the entire United States Army during World War II.
My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
What makes this http://www.military-art.com/mall/profiles.php?SigID=1278 a WP:RS?
Need to explain / spell out abbreviations like the one in the title (506 PIR)
Headers do not meet WP:HEAD
External links do not all seem to meet WP:EL

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]