Talk:British soldiers in the eighteenth century/GA1

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

Reviewer: Nikkimaria (talk · contribs) 01:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this article; my review should be posted shortly. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm placing this article on hold to allow time for the below issues to be addressed. Given the time of year, I'd be happy to allow extra time if needed to complete work. Happy holidays! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, unfortunately this has been open for quite a while and there are still unaddressed issues, so I'm going to not list it for now. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, shall work on un-addressed issues when I can (GemmaHist (talk) 09:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC))

Writing and formatting

 * Generally speaking, section headings should not begin with "The", and should be relatively short and clear. For example, rather than "The nature of recruitment", I would suggest simply "Recruitment"
 * ✅ — dropped the "The".  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * "punishments inflicted" -> "punishments were inflicted"?
 * ✅ — reworded to "punishments were applied" – "inflicted" sounds like an unplanned thing, e.g wounds inflicted in battle.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * "Motivations behind the volunteering nature were not solely patriotic, but commonly economic and profitable" - suggest removing "and profitable"
 * ❌ — the sentence is cited, I don't have access to the reference, so am not at ease removing what might be a true statement, as profiteering was most likely.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]
 * ✅ — "and profitable" removed until a suitable source can be found (GemmaHist (talk) 16:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC))


 * "therefore it was often questioned whether a standing force was actually needed" - is it possible to rephrase this to avoid the passive construction here?
 * ✅ — reworded "were" to "was" earlier in the same sentence, which reflects better here.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * It would be helpful to add some more wikilinks to allow interested readers to learn more - for example, for press gangs
 * "Many men who wished to become officers had to purchase their commission" - this suggests that some did not have to purchase their commissions. If so, why? If not, suggest rephrasing
 * ❌ — Some soldiers were promoted into officers without needing to pay. It's just an army thing. Do well, get promoted. You would not have a poor yet incredibly good Staff Sergeant that is better than their wealthy Commanding Officer.


 * Need more hyphens generally, for example in "18th century battlefield"
 * ❌ — not seeing any places that need hyphenating further, but as a conservative British English hyphen user, I prefer them only for compounding words, rather than "ease of reading" which isn't technically proper usage. Normally, I only hyphenate "18th century" if I've written "eighteenth-century" in full.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * There are a few places where phrasing could be tightened - for example, rather than "owing to the fact that" could use "because"
 * ✅ — replaced with "as".  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * Need conversions for imperial measurements
 * ✅ —  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 15:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * How much is a gill of rum?
 * ✅ — 1⁄4 pint – also added wikilink to gill (unit).  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]
 * — Also added info for "peck of oats" and wikilink to peck – also an unusual measurement.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * Don't link terms in See also already linked in article text
 * ✅ — Removed "Red coat (British army)" link – shouldn't have been in See also.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]

Accuracy and verifiability

 * Generally citations in the lead should be limited in favour of elaboration and citation in the article body
 * This link yields a 404 error
 * ✅— Removed link; no web archive found for it. May need reciting.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * Who is the author of this site, and what are his or her qualifications?
 * — No idea. Need info from article creator. Looks studenty and may need reciting.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]
 * ❌Have removed link and shall recite once found suitable reference (GemmaHist (talk) 09:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC))


 * This page appears to be a student project, and as such is questionable in terms of reliability
 * — Agreed. May need reciting.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]
 * Any updates on the re-citing? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌ Link to student website removed, currently attempting to find more reliable source (GemmaHist (talk) 09:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC))


 * An 'Army Ranks' page maybe? People like me are wondering if ranks were different during this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.185.152 (talk) 16:53, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Broad
✅ Have made edits to section titles in order to distinguish between life when on the move with the army, and the personal side of war (GemmaHist (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC))
 * There seems to be a slight overlap between the "Army life" and "Life as a redcoat soldier" sections
 * You might consider adding a brief overview section describing some of the wars in which soldiers of this period would have served
 * The lead covers some material that is not discussed in the article body
 * ✅ — move para down.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * You briefly mention the rapid spread of disease in army camps - do you have any further information about this?
 * Do we know about how much the monetary amounts would be in modern currency?
 * ❌ — Tricky, because the article does not discuss a specific year. If you convert 1d (1 pence) from 1756 (earliest year mentioned in lead) it would have been worth £0.46 in 2009 using RPI, 1d from 1800 worth £0.25, and 1d from 1815 (last year mentioned) worth £0.23. I got these results from an online calculator at http://www.measuringworth.com/ppoweruk/. The "age of the redcoat" covers such a large period of history, before and after the 18th century, that it would be impossible to determine a fair example from the entire 18th century discussed, and give a modern sum. Not sure how it would affect POV to only give examples from say, 1756 and 1815 when there are 98 other years.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]
 * ✅ — Looked through this and noticed that modern currency has been added to the "pay" section of the article. Does this count as completed? (GemmaHist (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC))
 * That's fine, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality

 * "faced war in a number of theatres throughout the European continent, the Americas and the colonies" - given that it was only late in this period that the American colonies gained independence, is it necessary to distinguish between "the Americas" and "the colonies"?
 * — I think "the colonies" in this case means places such as Hong Kong, British India the British West Indies, etc, as Redcoats were located in colonies throughout the world, as well as the Americas. Might be important to distinguish, so that readers don't think it refers purely to the American colonies, but more to events such as the War of 1812 and other non-American places.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF]


 * WP:W2W - check article for adherence to that page

Stability
No issues noted

Images

 * File:1st_Foot_Guards.jpg: what is the creator's date of death?
 * File:Fig_9_Recruiting_party-1-.jpg: this needs more complete source information
 * File:87th_Foot_uniform.png: page number?