Talk:2nd Cavalry Division (United Kingdom)

Improvements
I have completed the B class checklist and believe that it is a Start class article because it fails criteria 2 and 3. I believe that the article could be improved by addressing the following issues:


 * Date style: the article uses two different styles for the dates, one with the month followed by the day and another with the day followed by the month - it doesn't matter what style is uses, so long as it is consistent;
 * Coverage: the article could be expanded to discuss the major actions that the Division was involved in. Also, the article doesn't provide a date on which the Division was formed, although it does state when it disbanded;
 * References: there are an appropriate amount of in line citations, but would it be possible to include a number of hardcopy sources also, this would serve to improve the verifiability of the article;
 * Structure: the article has a lead section, but in reality after that it is a list, so it needs at least one or more sections of prose. Also, the addition of a Notes section (for in line citations), References for hardcopy sources, External links for websites and See also sections would serve to provide readers with more resources about the subject;
 * Supporting materials: whilst the article has an infobox and therefore meets criteria 5, it would be improved by adding a couple of images also.

Just a few ideas. When you feel that the article is ready for re-assessment, please add it to the list at WP:MHA. You might also consider taking it to peer review if you want to take it beyond B class. This can be done by adding it to the list at WP:MHPR. Hope this helps. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)