Talk:15th Battalion (Australia)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article 15th Battalion (Australia) 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
Date Process Result
July 24, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
August 28, 2013 WikiProject A-class review Approved
Current status: Good article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Australia / Military history (Rated A-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 15th Battalion (Australia) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
A-Class article A  This article has been rated as A-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (marked as Low-importance).
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for other than editorial assistance.
WikiProject Military history (Rated A-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. A-Class
A-Class article A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Copyediting notes[edit]

  • "Helliopolis": I'm not seeing relevant Google hits for that spelling.
  • "counter-attack": counterattack
  • "into "no man's land".": You use this phrase before this without quote marks.
  • I got down to Inter-war years. I don't see a problem with launching an A-class review. Best of luck. - Dank (push to talk) 21:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
    • G'day, Dank, thanks for taking a look. I've made those changes. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Took over where Dan left off -- outstanding points:

  • Under Interwar Years, "Upon re-forming, the battalion established its drill hall near the Brisbane Cricket Ground" is a bit ambiguous since we've just talked about a split in 1939 -- best state explicitly the re-forming battalion's name.
  • Under WWII, "the battalion sent a detachment of 200 men to undertake garrison duty in New Guinea" -- more specific about where, or the political entity of the time (e.g. Territory of Papua)? This becomes more important given you pipelink New Guinea to the New Guinea Campaign later.
    • Good point. I changed this to "Territory of Papua". AustralianRupert (talk) 00:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
  • "In late 1941, as Japan entered the war, the battalion received several large drafts of conscripts" -- seems a bit vague and hard to fathom; since Japan entered the war on 7 December, does this mean the several large drafts occurred over the next 24 days?
    • I tried to clarify this a bit more, as it wasn't quite right what I had before. The three mass drafts arrived Nov-Dec 41 according to Park. AustralianRupert (talk) 00:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
  • "free up troops from the 7th Division for further to the west" -- something missing here?
    • Yes, well spotted. I added a link to the following campaign. AustralianRupert (talk) 00:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Under Legacy, suggest spelling out and linking the decorations. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
    • I wasn't sure about this one, as I'd already linked several of them in the First World War section and didn't want to over-link. I spelt out MIDs and added a link for that, though, as I hadn't previously done so. I really appreciate you taking a look on this one, Ian; if you have any further points or feel I haven't quite met your intent, please let me know. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
      • Quite right, I was looking too far up the article to see if they were spelt out and linked -- what you've done is fine. I think the article's in good shape, looking fwd to the ACR. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)