Talk:Battle of Fort Davidson/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 01:13, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:13, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Sturmvogel - Expect some changes to the Fort Davidson description. I've been revising the version at Fort Davidson per the GA review, so once I get that version finalized, I'll copy it over or such (with attribution if needed, of course). Hog Farm Bacon 03:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Would you like for me to hold off for a few days for you to take care of that? After diving so deep into the Rodney article, I have an itch to work on some short-lived British destroyers, so no rush on my end.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- No rush on mine, either. I'm taking finals this week, so I'd be a little slow on the response anyway. Hog Farm Bacon 03:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Sturmvogel 66 - I've gotten the Fort Davidson stuff worked out, and the content here updated, so I'm ready for the review when you are. Hog Farm Bacon 23:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- No rush on mine, either. I'm taking finals this week, so I'd be a little slow on the response anyway. Hog Farm Bacon 03:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Would you like for me to hold off for a few days for you to take care of that? After diving so deep into the Rodney article, I have an itch to work on some short-lived British destroyers, so no rush on my end.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- No DABs
- Images appropriately licensed
- Link brigadier general and major on first use
- Done, I think
- Major in the lede.
- Oh, I thought you were referring to Major General for some reason. Fixed
- Major in the lede.
- Done, I think
- While intended to occur together, the attacks happened in a disjointed fashion, and were repulsed. Awkward
- Done
- Better, but if they occurred separately, wouldn't they necessarily be repulsed separately?
- I've tried again
- Better, but if they occurred separately, wouldn't they necessarily be repulsed separately?
- Done
- After the Fort Davidson repulses, the Confederate troops had low morale, Awkward, perhaps something like "Dispirited by the failed assaults on Fort Davidson, ..." or some such
- Done
- repulses reads very oddly here.
- Makes sense to me, but probably to nobody else. I've reworded it.
- repulses reads very oddly here.
- Done
- Hyphen in large scale
- Done
- poorly armed or unarmed proximity alert for "armed", maybe "or lacking weapons"
- Done
- More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:44, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
- his and Colonel Thomas C. Fletcher's, commander of the 47th Missouri Infantry, political aspirations awkward
- Done
- Clarify that Fort Curtis was located further south near Arcadia
- Clarified
- fort's walls were 100 feet (30 m) needs an adjective here
- Added
- 10 feet (3.0 m) wide change this to {{convert|10|ft|m|adj=mid|-wide}} to format this properly
- Done
- doubled "wide"
- Fixed.
- doubled "wide"
- Done
- the Confederate cannons fire on Fort Davidson fired?
- Fixed
- Clarify that the Confederates attacked from the south
- The actually attacked from multiple different directions. Slayback from the north, and the ones coming down Pilot Knob attacked from the east, as well.
- repulse them in piecemeal "one at a time" or "one by one"
- Went with individually
- in particular the 4th Missouri Cavalry Regiment and the 8th Missouri Cavalry Regiment trailing comma
- Added
- Alternate cannons with guns or artillery pieces, every so often
- Rephrased two of the instances.
- The repulses at For Davidson lowered the morale of the Confederate soldiers, and demonstrated that Price's army was of very low quality. awkward
- Rephrased
- Maybe it's just that I'm used to seeing "repulsed" and not "repulses", but that word still doesn't work for me here.
- Is attempt #3 better?
- Maybe it's just that I'm used to seeing "repulsed" and not "repulses", but that word still doesn't work for me here.
- Rephrased
- Combine cites 45 and 46--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
- Actually, one of the two was not the correct citation
- Sturmvogel 66 - Thanks for the review. All points so far have been replied to, does anything else need further work? Hog Farm Bacon 05:47, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- A few minor issues remain.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 10:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)