Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ulm Campaign

Ulm Campaign
In 1805, the Grand Army under Napoleon Bonaparte conducted one of the finest strategic turning maneuvers in history. This article hopes to tell that story; it has been peer reviewed to fix outstanding issues. All comments, questions, and criticisms are, as always, strongly welcomed.UberCryxic 04:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Support now that all the issues raised in the peer review have been resolved. Kirill Lokshin 05:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Support another great submission from MILHIST project! Rlevse 11:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Support & Comment Great Article. Although if you can find a map showing how much territory Napolean controlled in Europe, it would give the campaign some geographical perspective. Mercenary2k 16:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Done!UberCryxic 22:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Support on a fantastic article. The maps make it very easy to comprehend, and I like maps, so that's a double-plus from me.  --MPD01605 (T / C) 21:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Support as per above. It is unfortunately a little too rare to see military history articles with this much length and depth. Plus, images, maps, and all the appropriate infoboxes! LordAmeth 07:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment This is a very nice article for sure, but I can't support it yet:
 * The one-paragraph leads in sections kinda mess up the text. Either expand them, or merge them into the first subsection would be a good idea.
 * These are meant to be very succinct introductory remarks because I don't like starting off a section with a subsection. I've had them on other FAs without complaints. If you really think it is a big problem, however, then I will merge them.


 * The first section is not very nice. Three subsections with just one paragraph is just not very good-looking. Besides, this is a very important chapter. Something needs to be done about that.
 * I merged the Grandy Army and Austrian army sections. See if you think it looks better now.


 * Some people pointed out that the cquote template was not well-advised (had to remove it in one of my own FAs). I have no own opinion on the subject though.
 * Yeah I'm not sure about this either - that is, others have also told me I should remove it in prior experiences - but I still think it is useful to highlight an important feature of the subject.


 * You may want to reference some more things and/or to make some notes. You're sure familiar with the subject, but the average reader is quite probably less so. For instance, "Having been defeated twice in recent memory by France and keen on revenge, Austria" - what wars are you talking about? A note may be helpful to explain.
 * Done.


 * Some people apparently like pictures along both margins, not just on the right. Incidentally, it would probably allow for the maps to be bigger and more readable without clicking on them all.
 * Done.


 * And Cryxic, I would very much appreciate if you wouldn't rush this article through WP:MHPR so fast I can't even see them there, and that during a week-end when I spent a lot of time on WP... :) This way, everything I'm writing now would be corrected before that. :P -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  08:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I apologize....it's just that I had to nominate it in the weekend to get early feedback because I don't have much time to work on it during weekdays.UberCryxic 19:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose Too young. In case someone doesn't know, this article just appeared on "DYK" as "Wikipedia's newest articles". Putting it into the main page right after that as a featured article...well, that would seem just awkward. Just wait - I'm sure this article isn't perfect yet. Aran|heru|nar 10:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Much of the basis for this article already exists in the Battle of Ulm, but I do see your point. Nevertheless, can you offer some concrete suggestions for its improvement?UberCryxic 12:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, my concerns are answered in the article talk page. Aran|heru|nar 14:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment. I wonder if this would be the fastest 'from zero to FA' in our history, by any chance? :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The obvious article to compare to would be Second Malaysia Plan, which was submitted to FAC the same day it was created (but wasn't actually promoted until two weeks after that date). Kirill Lokshin 20:11, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Holy crap, that article was made an FAC 20 minutes after it was created. Way to go User:Johnleemk- that must've taken an incredibly long time to write, cite, and get pictures for on one's own. -- Kicking222 19:23, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Support now that the objections were resolved. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  20:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)