Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (E)


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

List of Knight&

 * Nominator(s): MisterBee1966 (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because of similar lists listed as A-Class articles. Thank you for your comments. MisterBee1966 (talk) 05:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Support with a few fussy comments: --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 09:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support: with a couple of comments:
 * according to the Featured article tools, there are no dab links, ext links all work (no action required);
 * some of the images appear to have alt text, while others don't. It is not an A-class requirement, but you might consider adding it in to make it consistent (suggestion only);
 * I currently only have a very limited amount of download available, so I haven't checked the licences on all of the images, but please make sure that they are all correct;
 * in the Background section, I think you need some commas here: "The first enactment Reichsgesetzblatt I S. 1573 of 1 September 1939 instituted the". For instance either side of "Reichsgesetzblatt I S. 1573";
 * done MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * in the Recipients section: "Of the one-hundred-and-eighty-eight awards made". I think it would be better to present this as: "Of the 188 awards made..."
 * done MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "Heer members received one-hundred-and-twenty-six", as above it would probably be best presented as "126" (but not if you implement the suggestion below);
 * done MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * same for "twenty-two" (22), "fifteen" (15) and "forty-one" (41);
 * done MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * this sounds awkward to me: "Heer members received one-hundred-and-twenty-six of the medals, six went to...". I suggest: "One hundred and twenty-six Heer members received the award, while six went to..." AustralianRupert (talk) 13:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I assume you mean not to implement this change if I implemented the "one-hundred-and-twenty-six → 126" chnage? Correct? MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * G'day, yes that's right, although I think it would sound smoother this way rather than the other. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:45, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Support I had concerns about an earlier list, but this one is good. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * "for a wide range multitude of reasons"?
 * "the Heer (Army), Kriegsmarine (Navy) and Luftwaffe (Air force)" Shouldn't the German words be italicised because they're not used often in English (maybe except for Luftwaffe)?
 * don't know. On another review, I forgot which one, the reviewers did not want italics. For sake of uniformity I would like all the same. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Why isn't "E" italicised as per WP:WORDSASWORDS?
 * "[Dr.] Ernst Ebeling" "[Dr.]" shouldn't be linked?
 * I don't understand "[Dr.] Ernst Ebeling" links to "Ernst Ebeling". what do you mean?
 * Why isn't "Oberkommando der Wehrmacht" italicised? Also, can you do something about the ranks in the table? The words aren't common. IDK, that's what I think should be done, but I'm not sure with guidelines, if there are any -- please point them out to me if I'm wrong.
 * See above, please. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. Another professional article in this epic series, and up to the same high standards as the others.
 * No dablinks found
 * External links are fine
 * Reflinks also fine
 * Prose is good, only one comment:
 * "This indicates that historian Veit Scherzer has expressed doubt regarding the veracity and formal correctness of the listing." I'm not sure what "formal correctness" actually means.
 * Image licenses seem good; no other concerns. EyeSerene talk 09:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.