- Previous peer review
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to start the FA nom process but give editors one more look at it before I do. I think this article has solid bones, with some great citations. I am working on removing the last few unauthoritiative sources and will do so before I pass it up for FA nom, so please don't comment on those. Part of my request involved editors examining citation format, prose, spelling, and other style issues which may be of concern. I would appreciate anything you can give me on this. Regards, Daysleeper47 (talk) 19:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Daysleeper, certainly not an area of my expertise but I'm happy to provide general comments where I think the article could be tweaked...
- "that fought with the Union Army" - could be ambiguous to fight with someone could read as in "to have a fight with someone..." - "fought on the side of the Union Army" perhaps?
- Adjusted with "a regiment of the Union Army"
- "Zouaves" - what does this mean?
- Linked --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Link "Commonwealth " accordingly.
- Linked --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep citations in numerical order - you have a [4][3] at the moment, there may be others..
- Question: If the citations are the same, I thought I could use the same citation name, thus only creating one entry. See citatin 11 as an example. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Response: Yeah, reusing them is fine, but reuse them in such an order that the citations appear numerically... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've rechecked and it looks fine now. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "flashy Zouave uniforms " "fashioned in flashy uniforms" POV unless you can cite "flashy". Even then, it's probably worth a reword.
- "fezzes " - link this to Fez.
- Linked --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You've redlinked "Henry Willard" - do you expect him to have an article, i.e. is he sufficiently notable to warrant one?
- He was a notable Washingtonian, who yes, I expect should or one day will have his own article. The hotel in question still exists and is one of Washington, D.C. finest. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Early action has several short paragraphs, consider merging a couple of them.
- " First Battle of Bull Run" needs linking in the "First Bull Run" section.
- Linked --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- " double-quick" - why italics?
- My own added emphasis from several months ago. Removed to maintain nuetrality. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "their foul conduct in camp" expand and explicitly cite I think!
- You have a section heading "Draft Riots.." is Riot a proper noun here? If not then it should be lower case, as you have it in the main prose.
- Draft Riots is generally assumed to be the name of the event, and the article maintains capitilization for both words. The only instance in the article in which I use the two words together is in the header, which I believe to be an acceptable usage. If another editor can find a described use to contrary, I will certainly change it. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There has been a slow move towards having a combined references section with subsections General (your References) and Specific (your Notes), possibly worth considering.
- I will have to look at how other articles have done that; I'm not familiar with that style but will certainly give it a look. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's all I have right now, I enjoyed the article a lot, let me know if I can help further. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the comments. Daysleeper47 (talk) 03:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One more comment - ensure you use the en-dash for separating page ranges in the citations. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]