Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Batu Lintang camp

Batu Lintang camp
I would like to get this article up to FA status and would be grateful for any input on any aspect of this article. Many thanks, Jasper33 17:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
Quite nice, overall. A number of points for further improvement, though: Keep up the good work! Kirill Lokshin 21:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Infobox Military Structure should be usable here, I think.
 * Done
 * The lead should be considerably longer—probably three full paragraphs—and should be a brief summary of the entire article.
 * Done
 * Section titles should generally omit a leading "The", per the MoS.
 * Done
 * The "Compounds" section would probably be neater if it used definition-list formatting (i.e. ).
 * I'm not sure what you mean by this - MOS isn't any use (that I can see, anyway).
 * I've cleaned it up for you. Kirill Lokshin 00:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kirill - it looks much better now, and I shall know how to next time. Jasper33 07:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There are a great many quotes worked into the text without the necessary context; each quote should be introduced, at a minimum, with its source (e.g. "According to prisoner diaries, ..." or something similar).
 * Done. For two quotes, it was difficult to easily add the information without breaking the flow, so the information has been added to the footnote
 * Month/day combinations should be linked to allow date preferences to work.
 * Done - I haven't linked months and years where no day is given (eg March 1942) or grouped dates (eg 15-18 August 1945). Is that right?
 * The latter type really should be linked in theory—as date preferences can be applied to it—but I don't know of any clean way of doing it, so it's probably okay to leave it unlinked. Kirill Lokshin 00:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The last three sections ("Post-war", "Batu Lintang camp in popular culture", and "Archives") are quite stubby; it may be better to combine them all into a single section (e.g. "Legacy" or something similar).
 * Done - now all under Post-war
 * The "See also" section should be eliminated; all of those terms are (or should be) linked in the text itself.
 * Done
 * The article is quite massively dependent on Ooi; it's almost certain that someone will ask about this during a FAC, so you should be prepared to justify the heavy reliance on him.
 * I agree that the article is Ooi-heavy. It is a two volume collection, introduced and edited by Ooi, of various memoirs and records from the POWs and internees, and so is an amazing resource. Jasper33 19:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all your comments, Kirill. I've sorted a couple of the quicker edits and hope to get the rest done tomorrow. Jasper33 19:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I have no suggestions or constructive criticism at the moment, but it's a very interesting subject, particularly the bit about the hidden radio. Fascinating, the kinds of tiny historical narratives that get totally hidden in surveys of the big picture. LordAmeth 08:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)