Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Operation Crimp


 * 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.

Promoted EyeSerene talk 09:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Operation Crimp

 * Nominator(s): Anotherclown (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because it was one of the key early engagements of the Australian involvement in the Vietnam War and I believe that it meets the criteria. Many thanks in advance. Anotherclown (talk) 04:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments : Looks very good to me. I have the following comments:
 * there are no dab links (no action required);
 * images lack alt text, you might consider adding it in (suggestion only);
 * Added now. Thanks for your patience (I'm really lazy when it comes to alt text!). Anotherclown (talk) 07:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * there is one external link that is reported to be broken and needs to be fixed: ;
 * I'm afraid I cannot resolve this - for some reason google has removed a number of editions of the Evening Independent from January 1966, including this one. Some are there but this one is now gone. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No dramas. I tried Web Archive and for some reason that wouldn't work, either. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for trying nonetheless. Anotherclown (talk) 07:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * the image caption in the infobox should be tweaked, "Sapper" shouldn't be capitalised, as in this case it is just like "soldier", i.e. an improper noun;
 * Done. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I suggest wikilinking "battalion" on first mention, i.e in the Background section "nine additional US battalions...";
 * Done. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Citation # 24 "Tunnel Rats", publisher information should probably be added;
 * Done. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * is there a page number for the Mangold and Penycate 2005 citation (# 66), or is it just to the whole work?
 * Good point, I've had to order the book to resolve this so it may require a week or so. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That wasn't necessary, but no dramas. The other half might have a drama with it, though. ;-)AustralianRupert (talk) 09:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Its about $11 so its no big imposition. I don't really have the time to go to the library plus I want the book anyway! Anotherclown (talk) 09:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Added the page number from Mangold and Penycate now. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 07:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * in the References, "Mangold, Tom; John Penycate" is formatted differently to "MacGregor, Sandy; Thomson, Jimmy";
 * Done. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * in the References "3rd ed." for Bradley is different to "Second ed." for Dennis and for Horner;
 * Done. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * in the References, the locations for the works cited might need more details, e.g. States, particularly for Maryborough, St Leonards, etc. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:21, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Anotherclown (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support: my concerns have been addressed. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Support -- Gave this a thorough review at GA, which it passed, and since I recommended there that it advance to ACR, I can hardly say no now! Re-read to check recent changes and am satisfied that prose, structure, coverage, referencing, and supporting materials all meet A-Class standard -- well done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:38, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I have no complaints on this one either. --Kumioko (talk) 21:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * SupportXavierGreen (talk) 00:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Belated support. Notes will be on the talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 15:09, 7 December 2010 (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.