Talk:Army of Sambre and Meuse/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 01:56, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

G'day Ruth, this article is in fine shape. A few comments from me:
 * in general, the flow of discussion about the formation of the army is broken by the Geopolitical terrain section. I strongly suggest moving it immediately below the Background section, as it is part of setting the context for the formation.
 * When the Army of the Sambre and Meuse is first mentioned, can you provide the commander's name at that point?
 * link Jean-Charles Pichegru at first mention rather than later on
 * the nowiki links in the geography subsection don't make sense to me and are essentially contrary to MOS:BRACKET, I strongly suggest making them active links
 * I have no idea where they came from....?


 * suggest "more than four or more times"
 * what was François Joseph Lefebvre's rank (when first mentioned in the body? General of Division? And drop it and his first names when he crops up later?
 * there are various spellings of Chasseurs which need to be fixed
 * I suggest trying to unsandwich the text with the maps by moving the location map down a few subsections
 * Go for consistency with demi-brigade, demi brigade and demibrigade, and "de Ligne" and plain "Ligne", and also watch the plurals, and Cheval and Chaval
 * done


 * 53rd m
 * "7th and 11th Dragoons"
 * done


 * Cavalry R r egiments
 * at the beginning of the Campaign of 1795 section, add a main template with Rhine Campaign of 1795
 * done


 * link Düsseldorf at first mention rather than further down
 * link Main (river)
 * link Jean-Baptiste Jourdan at first mention in the body, then drop Jean-Baptiste after that, per WP:SURNAME
 * done


 * Clerfayt isn't properly introduced, what was his rank and full name, and what army did he command? Links?
 * Army of Rhine and Moselle is italicised on a couple of occasions, but I'm not sure on what basis? It really shouldn't be per MOS:ITALICS
 * that was another editor. Undid it.


 * link Höchst (Frankfurt am Main)
 * link Johann von Klenau in the table
 * done


 * "larger, broader" seems a bit redundant
 * should "French Republican" be either "French Republican forces" or "French Republicans"?
 * done


 * Mannheim is linked twice
 * You need a space after fn 17
 * link Wilhelm von Wartensleben
 * done

That's me done, just placing on hold for the above comments to be addressed. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * there is mention of the Austrian Coalition, then of the Imperial and Coalition army, are they the same thing?
 * should the Army of the Lower Rhine and Army of the Upper Rhine be linked?
 * Bonaparte's successes where? In Italy? Perhaps mention that immediately and then say Wurmser was sent there
 * Archduke Charles? Has he been mentioned before? Link?
 * link Jean-Baptiste Kléber at first mention and unlink in table
 * link Moreau and with rank and full name at first mention in the body
 * link Rastatt
 * the article finishes quite abruptly, with no explanation of how the army was disestablished, or what happened to it after Charles' retreat
 * the images and maps look ok to me, except the caption for the second cropped map seems excessive, and should probably be explained in the geography subsection of the body.
 * Phipps has an unhyphenated isbn, the rest are hyphenated, the sources all look reliable to me.
 * thanks for input. I think I've got all these covered.  Didn't gche3ck them all off.  I've lost my ability to search the text -- some hinkiness in my edit functions, but I think I found first instances of mention, and linked those. auntieruth (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I went through and picked up the ones that you'd missed, except the "the article finishes quite abruptly, with no explanation of how the army was disestablished, or what happened to it after Charles' retreat" bit. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:32, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, added the other information per request. :)  Cheers, auntieruth (talk) 16:16, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Nicely done. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)


 * did a cheeky little ce, moved loc map to top of paragraph but wonder why it's so big and not in the infobox? Rev as desired Regards Keith-264 (talk) 15:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)