Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/King's Regiment (Liverpool)/Archive 1

The King's Regiment (Liverpool)
This article is presently incomplete, but I feel it's a good indicator of what should be expected when the article is "finished". At 33kb already, I estimate it will reach upto 45-50 kb, though could conceivably exceed that. Consequently, I've considered splitting the WWI and WWII sections into "The King's Regiment (Liverpool) in the World Wars (for want of a better name). What more does this article need? Any suggestions would be most welcome. I'm sure this article struggles in its prose at times, I just hope it doesn't condemn it. ;-) I would love for it to attain FA status this year, as the regiment's successor is amalgamating on 1 July, so it would be symbolic. SoLando (Talk) 20:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
A very good article, even if it is incomplete ;-) Some ideas: Hope that helps! Kirill Lok s  h in 22:57, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * An image for the infobox would be helpful.
 * Footnotes need to be numbered.
 * The bottom sections (VC recipients, battle honours) need some sort of formatting cleanup, since lists are generally frowned on at FAC; I'm not sure how best to arrange them, though. The honours section, in particular, is rather disorganized.
 * The introduction talks about the regiment being formed in 1685, but the article only deals with it post 1881. Are you planning to add the remainder of the material, or is it in another article?
 * I would recommend against splitting the article. Maximum FA length has shot up considerably, so this wouldn't be unusual even at 50K; and splitting it would create a daughter article devoid of needed background material.


 * Much obliged to you for your suggestions, Kirill! (It's better than "thanks dude!" ;-)) To answer:


 * I've been tempted to use an image of the regiment's cap badge, but I generally refrain from using fair use images. It is, however, an important representative symbol of the regiment, so there may not be a suitable alternative.
 * I'll number the footnotes soon. I think I may add a few more in the process, as they are in vogue ;-)
 * The battle honours section used to be in a region format, but its present form seems to be the official order (at least according to Difficulties be Damned and regiments.org). The VC recipients could be split off into a separate personnel article. Such an article, however, won't appear for a long time :-(
 * Yes, the regiment's pre-1881 history is located at 8th (The King's) Regiment of Foot, which is in an awful state right now. It's on my to-do list ;-)


 * Again, thank you! SoLando (Talk) 23:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Interesting. You might want to link the prior article in the series more prominently, then ;-)
 * Out of curiosity, are the previous regiment's battle honours usually carried over to the new one? (The list in this article includes the pre-1881 ones.)  Kirill Lok s  h in 23:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, there is a full link in the first paragraph of the history section ;-) Previous battle honours are inherited by new regiments, for the new regiment maintains the history of its predecessor(s). For an example, see this link Royal Green Jackets. Terrifying, non? ;-) SoLando (Talk) 00:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)