Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I have made substantial changes to this article, conducting extensive research and adding content, transforming the article from a bare list to an in-depth coverage of the subject matter.

Thanks, Exemplo347 (talk) 21:19, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from AustralianRupert: G'day, thanks for your efforts on this. I have a couple of suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 23:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• the citation style is currently a bit inconsistent, for instance compare ref 1 with ref 4;
• ref 19 should have an accessdate;
• refs 8, 9 and 15 could be consolidated with the WP:NAMEDREF
• there is information in the lead that isn't in the body, for instance the mention of the first unit raised, and the mention of when the Presidency armies absorbed into the British Indian Army in 1903. I suggest adding these to appropriate sections in the body as well;
• did the BNI fight in any notable battles? Currently the article doesn't really provide a clear picture of the BNI's operational history, focusing more on organisational aspects.
• you might consider adding an infobox: such as ((Infobox military unit)).