This is an well-written article on one of the most important battles in WWI, and marked turning points in Australian, British and Turkish history. edgeworth 11:03, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment References? If references are added, I'm likely to support. WegianWarrior 12:06, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Object- no references, the lead section is a little too short, and the "Aftermath" section, with a bullet point list of "What if..."s, seems out of place. Otherwise a comprehensive and well-written article. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 19:07, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object for same reasons as above --ZeWrestler ^Talk 00:28, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Object: A potentially excellent article on a subject of great significance, However, it still needs work, and should probably be referred to peer review.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 13:36, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Object: No matter what the campaign is referred to in Britain, Ireland, France, Turkey, Newfoundland, Australia, New Zealand, India or Nepal (some of the forces of which participated), in NONE of these is it referred to as the 'Battle of Gallipoli'. Even the Turkish name does not translate as 'battle'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hayaman (talk • contribs) 10:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]