Talk:Battle of Kunersdorf/GA1

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Lead and infobox;
 * 41,000 Russians and 24,000 Austrians "respectively"
 * No need to cite the info in the infobox because it is just a representation of already cited data in the prose this is a debatable change, and I'll leave it this way until the MH standard changes.
 * Section 1;
 * Frankfurt an der Oder; in lead it is "Frankfurt (Oder)", be consistent fixed
 * Section 2;
 * suited itself well to defense; is a bit awkward and confusing, reword  fixed
 * south-west, north east, south east, south-east; be consistent, use hyphenation or just leave it. Fix through the article fixed
 * Why italics for "all" in "that all the Allies"? Frederick thought that he would face a few, not all  emphasis
 * army around to the south east This way; a full stop after "south east" fixed
 * Section 3;
 * 2 a.m. -> 2:00am, per MOS:TIME fixed
 * redeployment is a single wordfixed
 * 11:30, am or pm?, format per MOS:TIMEfixed
 * 80 enemy cannon -> 80 enemy cannons
 * Who is Prince Henry?fixed
 * Section 3.1;
 * rank or title of Friedrich Wilhelm von Seydlitz?fixed
 * Cossacks is over linkedfixed
 * last-ditch effort; it is not a standard dictionary word, better use general wording Merriam webster, Cambridge, Columbia, and in thesauruses.
 * led an Austrian and Russian horse counter-attack; this is a bit confusing, did he uses horses to counter or what? make it clearer ok, but general use for cavalry is "horse"
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 15:31, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Section 4;
 * they participated in the Battle of Maxen; did they win the battle? mention that moved to footnote
 * Cossack and Carl Heinrich von Wedel; they are over-linked fixed
 * Lieutenant General August Frederick von Itzenplitz(5 September); care the spacing fixedfixed
 * The crushing defeat fixed (although sources say"crushing")
 * Henry? What was his full name, any rank, title, position? and link fixed
 * her nephew; mention the full name fixed
 * Section 5; all good
 * 3.8% confidence, violation unlikely
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 23:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)