Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Battle of Moscow

Battle of Moscow
After almost 2 months of research and writing, this article about one of the most epical battles of WWII is finally done (sort of). Since I spent so much time writing it, I need an external view and help more than ever.

Thanks, Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  18:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
I'll reiterate my earlier comments about the article needing a thorough copyedit (primarily for issues of grammar rather than style, at this point). I'll try to go over it sometime soon (this weekend, perhaps?), but multiple copyeditors would probably be beneficial here. Aside from that: Overall, though, the material looks solid; I suspect this will be ready for FAC in a couple of weeks, if not sooner. Kirill Lokshin 00:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Month/day combinations should always be linked—even in headings—to allow date preferences to work properly.
 * Care should be taken to keep the tone appropriately academic; wording like "the Army Group North was stopped cold" is probably too informal.
 * Images shouldn't be allowed to drift too close together along a single margin, or they will cause extra spacing to appear in the text.
 * Quotes shouldn't be italicized (and aren't consistently, in any case).
 * It might be worthwhile to use OKW/OKH (whichever one is more appropriate) in place of the generic "German high command".
 * The first paragraph of the "Casualties" section is uncited and has some pretty noticeable weasel-wording (e.g. "some historians").
 * Self-references (e.g. "In this article..." in the "Casualties" section) should be avoided.
 * The "References" section needs to be alphabetized and should include everyone cited in the footnotes (Jukes, notably, is missing).
 * Not really a complaint related to this article per se, but the monster template at the bottom needs to be killed somehow, as it's way too big of a see-also section. I recall that turning it into a portal was discussed; do you know if anything came of that idea?


 * I think I corrected all your objections. Save the copyedit that is, because I'm utterly bad at grammar (in all three languages I speak). I'm looking more than ever for copyeditors :) -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  19:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)