Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Walter Model

Walter Model
This started out as some minor corrections to a decent if short article, and turned into a full-blown research project. After ~2 weeks, I figure it's definitely B-class, hopefully GA-class, with luck maybe even A-class. Comments welcome. -- Hongooi 14:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Woodym555
Just a little comment after a quick run through.
 * The references do not use the appropriate template, see [|Cite book template] for more information. Most people use only the information in "Example 2". You will need to supply ISBNs (where available) for all the books used. Woodym555 15:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, fixed up now. -- Hongooi 16:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Some more comments
 * Even with 88 citations some paragraphs do not have citations. According to WP:CITE there should at least be a citation for every paragraph


 * Hm, are you sure? I just had a look at WP:CITE and all it says is that material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs to be cited. There doesn't seem to be any hard-and-fast rule that every paragraph needs a citation. That said, I just had a look at the article again, and there's some areas where I left out the cites. Thanks for the heads-up.


 * No i don't believe there is any set down rule. I was judging it against current FA criteria and my experience of FA nominations. In FAC comments it is regularly commented that paragraphs should have citations. Also if a whole paragraph does not have anything that could be considered contentious, even by a sceptical viewer, then it is probably not concise enough and contains no real information. Anyway, the references that you have added have fixed my problem with it in the first place. Woodym555 19:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The statement "He has been called the Wehrmacht's best defensive tactician." in the lead is a POV statement in its nature and as such should be cited.


 * Done.


 * Images, some of the images are correctly tagged but are unsure of sources and could use some more detailed fair use as you have with the infobox photo. Many of these are copyrighted and this can be a stumbling block for FA and GA. (This is being a bit fastidious and nit-picky though)


 * Yeah, it's a toughie finding pictures for these WW2 articles. I'll see if I can add more detail on the description pages.


 * Rank data, could this be put into a table. This is personal preference (and entirely optional) but i think it might look better in table format.
 * Other than that i recommend submitting it for GA or A-Class review. It certainly seems able to pass the criteria. Woodym555 11:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I've given it another round of tidying-up. I might submit it for A-class review in the next few days. Thanks again for your comments. -- Hongooi 13:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)