Jump to content

Talk:1st Brigade, 7th Infantry Division (United States)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article1st Brigade, 7th Infantry Division (United States) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 31, 2009Good article nomineeListed
July 15, 2009Good topic candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:1st Brigade, 7th Infantry Division (United States)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


There's some confusion about the brigade numbers; they should be 13th and 14th. And clarify that the brigade HQs were not active from 1940 until the division was reorganized under ROAD. Other than that looks good. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed both. -Ed!(talk) 02:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This sentence needs to be fixed on all 3 articles. By 1994, the garrison closed the Division subsequently relocated to Fort Lewis, Washington. And the other comments that I copied from the 3rd Brigade article: There's some confusion with tenses and stuff regarding the BRAC plan for the division and what actually happened. I think that the 2nd and 3rd Brigades formally deactivated in 1993 at Ft. Ord, while the division deactivated later. Is that correct? If so please clarify that in the article. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How does it look now? -Ed!(talk) 17:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    It would be nice so see listings of the brigade's OB at various points in time.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:33, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1st Brigade, 7th Infantry Division (United States). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lot of content removed after GAN review

[edit]

@Sturmvogel 66, Ed!, and Buckshot06: The article is fairly good enough while it was reviewed at GAN in 2009, but after that a lot of prose content from the article was removed. I am very much concerned about present state of the article compared to revision reviewed at GAN.--Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Buckshot06 removed the material because it was not about the brigade itself but rather about the wider operations of the 7th Division. I some of the removal was justified as such information should be only on the main division article. However, I question the necessity of removing information about the actions of the division headquarters in the World Wars, given that HQ 7th Infantry Division is part of the brigade lineage. Kges1901 (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a look at this later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is a question of whether the article follows the official lineage of 1st Bde, 7th ID, or the formation that is the article title. That is why I would have removed the data about the division HQ - the data should be at the division page. This is an issue we've just faced at 90th Guards Tank Division and numerous USAF articles. The approach is inconsistent across en:WP. Hope this explains why I did what I did, and open to comments and thoughts. Happy New Year!! Buckshot06 (talk) 20:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA concerns

[edit]

As seen in the discussion above, there was significant content removed as off-topic. However, the Honors section is still written with the assumption that the content removed applies to the subject at hand. Additionally, a good chunk of what is left is sourced to Global Security, which is no longer considered a reliable source. As it is, this article does not meet the GA criteria. Hog Farm Talk 18:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:1st_Brigade,_7th_Infantry_Division_(United_States)&oldid=1263992666"