User talk:DeadlyRampage26

GA review review
Hi DeadlyRampage26, and thank you for getting involved in reviewing good article nominations. I noticed your review of Breonna Taylor, a page I have watchlisted. I'm concerned that it was a bit too cursory. For example, you may have conducted spot checks, as required by the reviewing guidelines, but you did not note that or reveal the results. Additionally, there are multiple sentences and paragraphs that are uncited; are you confident that all of them are content that could not be reasonably challenged? If not, the nominator has some work to do to meet criterion 2b. These aren't the only problems with such a quick review, but I tried to keep it to ones that are not subjective. If you'd like more input, you could reach out to one of the Good article mentorship/Mentors. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi thanks for reaching out. I tried my best to match with the criteria and determine from their but I understand that I am new to the area and probably have errors. As for the citations, I did notice some of the events that you mentioned above. However, I referenced back to an edit I made on Donald Trump where I had criticised some unsourced areas and was told by a more experienced editor that it was generally OK (they referenced a specific WP rule) so long as the topic was covered broadly in another source somewhere else in the article. I might have misunderstood that or something, I'm not completely sure. Thanks for bringing your concerns to me. Since I have already passed the GA do you know of a way to pull it back until these problems could be corrected? DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 02:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You know, I'm not really sure! That'd be a good question to ask at the discussion at WT:GAN. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Surface Fleet Review
[My note from the assessment page: I am leaving a message on your talk page about additional citations and perhaps a minor tweak which can bring this up to B class. Rather than leave it with a lower rating, I think we should leave the request open and you can note that the article has been revised and ready for assessment.]

Comments This article can be brought up to B class relatively easily. I recommend that you make the following additions or changes in this article for a B class assessment. The suggestions below are not likely to be a problem for you since they mostly are about where citations are needed.

Every paragraph should end with a citation. Otherwise, it is not clear whether the preceding information is covered by a footnote earlier in the paragraph.

With the exception of information tables, which can be referenced in more than one way, Refs should not be in a separate Ref note at the top of a section or paragraph but should accompany the text in the appropriate places.

If all the information in a table is from a single source, that source can be cited in the caption to the table or introductory sentence. You have done that for the timeline table, assuming nothing in the table is not verifiable from the source, including items to be determined.

You will see tables with every item in the table accompanied by a citation. This is usually seen when the information in the table comes from different sources.

The military history bot rates articles not put up for assessment, up to B class. The bot will downgrade an article when it sees no citation for each point in a list and in the introductory sentence if it ends a paragraph or seems to be a separate paragraph. Coordinators and experienced assessors, who review bot assessments monthly, will overrule the bot if the opening sentence or caption has a citation meant to cover all of the bullet points. If these come from separate sources, separate citations should be given. Coordinators will also downgrade an assessment if they judge that the bot overrated the article, which does happen occasionally.

The sentences after the first sentence in notes for the table have no citations. Although the second sentence in each short paragraph may be logical or obvious, they appear to be predictions or speculation. Without citation of a source, they would be considered original research or opinion and not appropriate for a Wikiped article which is to be based on reliable sources. The first sentence of the second short paragraph apparently comes from a source that can be cited.

Notes require citations if the content is not completely obvious that the information comes from a cited source (and it usually probably isn't.)

If you have any questions, please let me know. Donner60 (talk) 23:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * OK yep just replying from work Right now will get on that later DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 04:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)